The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About051-03TOWN OF NANTUCKET BOARD OF APPEALS NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 025548 r Date: July 2008 03 To: Parties in Interest and.Others concerned with the Decksion of the BOARD OF APPEALS in the Application of the following: Application No.: 051-03 Owner/Applicant: Rugged Scott, LLC Enclosed is the Decision of the BOARD OF APPEALS which has this day been filed with the office of the Nantucket Town Clerk. An Appeal from this Decision may be taken pursuant to Section 17 of Chapter 40A, Massachusetts General Laws. Any action appealing the Decision must be brought by filing a complaint in Land Court within TWENTY (20) days after this day's date. Notice of the action with a copy of the complaint and certified copy of the Decision must be given to the Town Clerk so as to be received within such TWENTY (20) days. Michael J. O'Mara, Chairman cc: Town Clerk Planning Board Building Commissioner/Zoning Enforcement Officer PLEASE NOTE: MOST SPECIAL PERMITS AND VARIANCES HAVE A TIME LIMIT AND WILL EXPIRE IF NOT ACTED UPON ACCORDING TO NANTUCKET ZONING BY-LAW SECTION 139-30 (SPECIAL PERMITS); SECTION 139-32 (VARIANCES). ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE CALL THE NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OFFICE AT 508-228-7215. NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 2 Fairgrounds Road Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 CLARIFICATION AND TECHNICAL CORRECTION: 1. At a public meeting of the Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals, on Friday, April 11, 2008, at 1 P..M., in the Conference Room, in the former Electric Company building, 2 Fairgrounds Road, Nantucket, Massachusetts, the Board of Appeals made the following MINOR MODIFICATION to the Comprehensive Permit in the matter of the RUGGED SCOTT, LLC project (File No. 051-03): 2. Applicant's attorney presented a request for two minor modifications to the Comprehensive Permit for the project, recorded at the Nantucket Registry of Deeds at Book 1010, Page 01. The first request was to modify the design and location of the pool and community center within Lot 42 to accommodate drainage needs for the project also served by that lot. Applicant's attorney presented plans and elevations showing the revised designs and location. The second request was to reduce the square footage of the dwelling units on up to eight unsold lots (Lots 7, 8, 15, 16, 18, 21, 25 and 26) by up to between 48 square feet less that prior to 354 square feet less than prior, in order to reduce the price point at which they would be marketed and sold. Applicant's attorney presented revised design plans for each of the unit types on these lots. Applicant's attorney also presented evidence that all of the existing purchasers had been provided notice of the application and supporting documents by email, and that the only current lot owner directly viewing the pool and community center responded, stating that he did not object to the alterations proposed. 3. The Board of Appeals determined that the modifications requested constituted minor medications that posed no detrimental effect, and that no public hearing was necessary for the requested changes. The Board acted, by UNANIMOUS vote of the members participating, to accept and approve the following modification to the Comprehensive Permit: (a) The location of the pool and community center are modified as per the attached site plan, on the condition that the former location will be a grass lawn area utilized for drainage purposes. (b) That the square footage for the dwelling units on Lots 7, 8, 15, 16, 18, 21, 25 and 26 may be constructed either as previously approved, or in the alternative, as per the table below and the plans in File 051-03. 1 Lot # Prior SF Alternate SF 7 2314 SF 1960 SF 8 1947 SF 1899 SF 18 1947 SF 1899 SF 21 1947 SF 1899 SF 15 1947 SF 1899 SF 16 2122 SF 1925 SF 25 2314 SF 1960 SF 26 1947 SF 1899 SF As a Minor Modification, there is no appeal period for this decision to be recorded at the Nantucket Registry of Deeds. n Nantucket, ss. RR Lisa Botticelli David Wiley COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS On this 7 )4� day of June, 2008, before me, the undersigned notary public, personally appeared 11406 D W44- --- , proved to me through satisfactory evidence of identification, which was , to be the person whose name is signed on the preceding or attached document, and acknowledged to me that he/she signed voluntarily for its stated purpose, on behalf of the Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals Notary Public Printed Name: ✓Gneysc,r. Moot{ My Commission Expires: 44eeA AP, a0/3 2 TOWN OF NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 1 EAST CHESTNUT STREET NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554 PHONE 508-228-7215 FAX 508-228-7205 NOTICE A Public Hearing of the NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS will be held at 6:00 P.M., THURSDAY, JULY 31, 2003, LARGE GROUP INSTRUCTION ROOM, NANTUCKET HIGH SCHOOL, 10 SURFSIDE ROAD, Nantucket, Massachusetts, on the Application of the following: RUGGED SCOTT LLC BOARD OF APPEALS FILE NO. 051-03 PLEASE NOTE: THE FIRST PART OF THE MEETING WILL BE DEVOTED TO A TRAINING AND INFORMATION SESSION GIVEN BY ED MARCHANT, THE ZBA'S CONSULTANT. THE PUBLIC IS INVITED TO ATTEND. This is an Application for a Comprehensive Permit under Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 40A, Sections 20 — 23. Applicant proposes to construct 72 dwelling units (40 free standing single- family units and 16 two-family buildings) on a vacant 10 -acre parcel of land running between Rugged Road and Scott's Way, approximately 500 feet east of Fairgrounds Road. The homes would be arranged around a central village green and community building. In the LUG -2 zoning district, minimum lot area is 80,000 square feet; minimum frontage is 150 feet; minimum front yard setback is 35 feet; minimum side and rear yard setback is 15 feet; and maximum ground cover ratio is 4%. The proposed project would have lots ranging from about 2,112 square feet to about 11,353 square feet with the average lot area being about 4,898 square feet. The ground cover ratio is planned to average about 24%, with some lots having a ratio as high as 45%. There would be a mix of three price levels, i.e., low/moderate and middle income and market rate units. The ZBA will be reviewing the entire project and separate site plan. The opportunity to review the project and submit comments to the ZBA for review during the hearing process will be available to such Town entities as the Board of Selectmen, Department of Public Works, Wannacomet Water Company, Historic District Commission, Nantucket Fire Department, Nantucket Police Department, Traffic Safety Committee, Conservation Commission, Health Department, and the Planning Board. The Applicant is seeking the following relief: NANTUCKET TOWN CODE Chapter 127, Streets and Sidewalks § 127-1. Exception from the requirement for a permit for excavation or alteration of a public way, sidewalk or bicycle path from the Nantucket Department of Public Works and the Board of Selectmen. Chapter 139, Zoning § 139-7.A. Exception to permit a clubhouse/community building, which may also contain a retail shop, within a Limited Use General -2 ("LUG - 211) zoning district. § 139-12.B(3)(a). Exception from the requirement that the application be referred to the Nantucket Water Commission. § 139-16.A. Exception from the Intensity Regulations as to lot area, frontage, setbacks and ground cover ratio. § 139-16.D. Exception from the regularity formula. § 139-18. Exception from on-site parking requirements for the lot, which will contain the proposed clubhouse. § 139-20. Exception from the provision of off-street loading facilities for the lot, which will contain the proposed clubhouse. § 139-20.1. Exception from the regulations as to driveway access. § 139-23. Exception from the Site Plan Review provisions for the proposed clubhouse. § 139-24.A. Exception from the Phased Development provisions. § 139.26.C. Exception from the requirements under clause (1) for submission of a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Historic District Commission and under clause (2)(b) for submission of a sewer connection permit from the Department of Public Works in connection with a building permit application. § 139-28.A(3) and B(2). Exception from the requirement for certifications from the Historic District Commission before obtaining an occupancy permit. RULES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE SUBDIVISION OF LAND ISSUED BY THE NANTUCKET PLANNING BOARD § 2.06b(18). Exception to the required on-site disposal area. § 4.03a(1). Exception from the street width standards to allow pavement widths for the various proposed subdivision roadways of 16 feet (one-way road with no on street parking), 20 -feet (one-way road with on street parking limited to one side), 20 -feet (two-way road with no on street parking), and 24 -feet (two-way road with on street parking limited to one side). § 4.03e. Exception from the minimum design standards for streets to allow the use of a 30 -foot right-of-way ("R.O.W.") in place of the required 40 -foot right-of-way. § 4.03e. Exception from the minimum design standards for streets to allow pavement widths of 16 -feet (one-way road with no on street parking), 20 -feet (one-way road with on street parking limited to one side), 20 -feet (two-way road with no on street parking), and 24 -feet (two-way road with on street parking limited to one side). § 4.04b. Exception to allow the use of a Turning "T" layout similar to that shown within Plate No. 4. § 4.06b(3). Exception to allow the use of underground stormwater leaching/infiltration systems in place of the required leaching basins. § 4.06b(5). Exception to allow the use of gas and oil separators designed in compliance with section 4.06b(6) and the Department of Environmental Protections Stormwater Management Policy in place of the gas and oil separator specified by Appendix A, Plate 13. § 4.19. Exception to the requirement for a bicycle path within the boundaries of the project. HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION The applicant requests an exception from all requirements for the submission of plans and materials to the Nantucket Historic District Commission ("HDC"). FEES AND SECURITY; GENERAL The applicant requests an exception from the requirements for all local fees relating to the affordable housing units in this project, including but not limited to fees for building permits, sewer connection permits, and water connection permits. The applicant further requests an exception from any requirement to post a bond, cash, covenant or other security in connection with the construction of the proposed infrastructure improvements. The applicant further requests exceptions from the applicability of such other provisions of local by-laws and regulations as would otherwise be applicable to the project. The Premises is located at 15 and 19 RUGGED ROAD; 6 and 8 SCOTT'S WAY; Assessor's Map 67, Parcels 170, 170.1, 170.2 and 170.3; Plan Book 21, Page 106, Lots 19A, 19B, 19C and 19D. The property is zoned Limited - Use -General -2. EA Nancy J. S yr ns, Chairman c3 w --� THIS NOTICE IS AVAILABLE IN LARGE PRINT OR OTHER ER�NATIVE FORMATS. PLEASE CALL 508-228-7215 FOR FURTHER INF AVON. c-� 00 w 0 TOWN OF NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF MPPEALS 1 EAST CHESTNUTS E � :q3 NANTUCKET, MASSACHUT W2SP54 PHONE 508-228-7215 FAX 508-228-7205 TOWN CL�L7ii NOTICE A Public Hearing of the NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS will be held at 6:00 P.M., THURSDAY, JULY 31, 2003, LARGE GROUP INSTRUCTION ROOM, NANTUCKET HIGH SCHOOL, 10 SURFSIDE ROAD, Nantucket, Massachusetts, on the Application of the following: RUGGED SCOTT LLC BOARD OF APPEALS FILE NO. 051-03 PLEASE NOTE: THE FIRST PART OF THE MEETING WILL BE DEVOTED TO A TRAINING AND INFORMATION SESSION GIVEN BY ED MARCHANT, THE ZBA'S CONSULTANT. THE PUBLIC IS INVITED TO ATTEND. This is an Application for a Comprehensive Permit under Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 40A, Sections 20 — 23. Applicant proposes to construct 72 dwelling units (40 free standing single- family units and 16 two-family buildings) on a vacant 10 -acre parcel of land running between Rugged Road and Scott's Way, approximately 500 feet east of Fairgrounds Road. The homes would be arranged around a central village green and community building. In the LUG -2 zoning district, minimum lot area is 80,000 square feet; minimum frontage is 150 feet; minimum front yard setback is 35 feet; minimum side and rear yard setback is 15 feet; and maximum ground cover ratio is 4%. The proposed project would have lots ranging from about 2,112 square feet to about 11,353 square feet with the average lot area being about 4,898 square feet. The ground cover ratio is planned to average about 24%, with some lots having a ratio as high as 45%. There would be a mix of three price levels, i.e., low/moderate and middle income and market rate units. The ZBA will be reviewing the entire project and separate site plan. The opportunity to review the project and submit comments to the ZBA for review during the hearing process will be available to such Town entities as the Board of Selectmen, Department of Public Works, Wannacomet Water Company, Historic District Commission, Nantucket Fire Department, Nantucket Police Department, Traffic Safety Committee, Conservation Commission, Health Department, and the Planning Board. 0 1-71� The Applicant is seeking the following relief: `"' �.; NANTUCKET TOWN CODEf' c c 00 Chapter 127, Streets and Sidewalks ::v �. § 127-1. Exception from the requirement for a permit fbr excayatio�_for alteration of a public way, sidewalk or bicycle path from the d;antucket Department of Public Works and the Board of Selectmen. Chapter 139, Zoning § 139-7.A. Exception to permit a clubhouse/community building, which may also contain a retail shop, within a Limited Use General -2 ("LUG - 211) zoning district. § 139-12.B(3)(a). Exception from the requirement that the application be referred to the Nantucket Water Commission. § 139-16.A. Exception from the Intensity Regulations as to lot area, frontage, setbacks and ground cover ratio. § 139-16.D. Exception from the regularity formula. § 139-18. Exception from on-site parking requirements for the lot, which will contain the proposed clubhouse. § 139-20. Exception from the provision of off-street loading facilities for the lot, which will contain the proposed clubhouse. § 139-20.1. Exception from the regulations as to driveway access. § 139-23. Exception from the Site Plan Review provisions for the proposed clubhouse. § 139-24.A. Exception from the Phased Development provisions. § 139.26.C. Exception from the requirements under clause (1) for submission of a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Historic District Commission and under clause (2)(b) for submission of a sewer connection permit from the Department of Public Works in connection with a building permit application. § 139-28.A(3) and B(2). Exception from the requirement for certifications from the Historic District Commission before obtaining an occupancy permit. RULES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE SUBDIVISION OF LAND ISSUED BY THE NANTUCKET PLANNING BOARD § 2.06b(18). Exception to the required on-site disposal area. § 4.03a(1). Exception from the street width standards to allow pavement widths for the various proposed subdivision roadways of 16 feet (one-way road with no on street parking), 20 -feet (one-way road with on street parking limited to one side), 20 -feet (two-way road with no on street parking), and 24 -feet (two-way road with on street parking limited to one side). § 4.03e. Exception from the minimum design standards for streets to allow the use of a 30 -foot right-of-way ("R.O.W.") in place of the required 40 -foot right-of-way. § 4.03e. Exception from the minimum design standards for streets to allow pavement widths of 16 -feet (one-way road with no on street parking), 20 -feet (one-way road with on street parking limited to one side), 20 -feet (two-way road with no on street parking), and 24 -feet (two-way road with on street parking limited to one side). § 4.04b. Exception to allow the use of a Turning "T" layout similar to that shown within Plate No. 4. § 4.06b(3). Exception to allow the use of underground stormwater leaching/infiltration systems in place of the required leaching basins. § 4.06b(5). Exception to allow the use of gas and oil separators designed in compliance with section 4.06b(6) and the Department of Environmental Protections Stormwater Management Policy in place of the gas and oil separator specified by Appendix A, Plate 13. § 4.19. Exception to the requirement for a bicycle path within the boundaries of the project. HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION The applicant requests an exception from all requirements for the submission of plans and materials to the Nantucket Historic District Commission ("HDC"). FEES AND SECURITY; GENERAL The applicant requests an exception from the requirements for all local fees relating to the affordable housing units in this project, including but not limited to fees for building permits, sewer connection permits, and water connection permits. The applicant further requests an exception from any requirement to post a bond, cash, covenant or other security in connection with the construction of the proposed infrastructure improvements. The applicant further requests exceptions from the applicability of such other provisions of local by-laws and regulations as would otherwise be applicable to the project. The Premises is located at 15 and 19 RUGGED ROAD; 6 and 8 SCOTT'S WAY; Assessor's Map 67, Parcels 170, 170.1, 170.2 and 170.3; Plan Book 21, Page 106, Lots 19A, 19B, 19C and 19D. The property is zoned Limited - Use -General -2. Nancy J. S yr ns, Chairman THIS NOTICE IS AVAILABLE IN LARGE PRINT OR OTHER ALTERNATIVE FORMATS. PLEASE CALL 508-228-7215 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION. 2 �S 4 d.5- i RISING TIDE DEVELOPMENT LLC 32 ARLINGTON STREET • CAMBRIDGE • MASSACHUSETTS • 02140 617.549.3232 TEL • 617.492.1143 FAX • joshposner@attbi.com 03 JUN 18 P 1 :43 TOWN L�_ ._urs May 30, 2003 Nantucket Board of Appeals Town of Nantucket 1 East Chestnut Street Nantucket, MA 02554 Re: Rugged Scott LLC Comprehensive Permit Application Dear Board Members: Under MG.L. Chapter 40B the Board is given 30 days from the filing date to begin the process of reviewing the above referenced application which we have filed May 30, 2003. Given the logistical and scheduling considerations which we have discussed with the Zoning Administrator, this letter serves to extend the time period during which the Board must begin the review process until August 15, 2003. We understand that the Board currently has targeted July 31, 2003 as the date for the first public hearing. We look forward to working with you to review our proposal. Rugged Scott LLC by Joshua Posner cc: Arthur I. Reade, Jr. Esq. NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 1 EAST CHESTNUT STREET NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554 FEE: $3Q0.00 CASE NO. 00<9-03 APPLICATION FOR RELIEF Owner's name(s): Rugged Scott LLC Mailing address: c/o Reade, Gullicksen, Hanley & Gifford, LLP Applicant's name(s): Same Mailing address: 6 Young's Way, Post Office Bog 2669, Nantucket, Massachusetts 02584 Locus address: 15 and 19 Rugged Road; 6 and 8 Scott's Way Assessor's Map 67 Parcels: 170, 170.1, 170.2 and 170.3 Plan Book & Page: 21-106 Lot Nos.: 19A. 19B. 19C and 19D Date lot acquired: June 14, 2002 Deed Ref.: 761-53 Zoning District: Limited Use General -2 Uses on Lot – Commercial: None x Yes (describe) (Vacant land) Residential: Number of dwellings Building Date(s): All pre -date 7/72? Building Permit Nos: Previous Zoning Board Application Nos.: or Duplex Apartments Rental Rooms, C of O(s)? State below or on a separate addendum specific relief sought (Special Permit, Variance, Appeal), Section of the Zoning By-law, and supporting details, grounds for grant of relief, listing any existing nonconformities: This is an application for a Comprehensive Permit under Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 40B, Sections 20-23. See the attached addendum and supporting materials. I certify that the information knowledge, under the pail�f SIGNATURE: If not owner or owner's a ed herein is substantially complete and true to the best of my Aties of perjury. enclose proof of Applicant L,,,"" Attorney/Agent_ to bring this matter before the Board) FOR ZBA O ICE USE / Application received on: ,7 /� /03 By: i.. _Complete: V Need copies?: Filed with Town Clerk: &/,F/&_ Planning Board: 61HI03 Building Dept.: 611 �43 By:LF Fee deposited with Town Treasurer: 611? J3 By:j/ Waiver requested?: Granted:—/—/_ Hearing notice posted with Town Clerk: Mailed: (P/a?A 31&M: 7/ 10103& Z//7/03 7/Z� Hearing(s) held on: 71-L163 Opened on: -7/31/03 Continued to:—/—/ Withdrawn?:_/ / DECISION DUE BY:—/—/— Made:—/—/ Filed w/Town Clerk:—/—/ Mailed: / / DECISION APPEALED?:—/—/ SUPERIOR COURT: LAND COURT Form 4/03/03 New Housing for Rugged Road and Scotts Way Nantucket, Massachusetts Comprehensive Permit Application Under M.G.L. Chapter 40B, Sections 20-23 Submitted by: Rugged Scott LLC April 29, 2003 Town of Nantucket, Massachusetts ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Premises affected: A 10 acre parcel of land running between Rugged Road and Scotts Way approximately 500 feet east of Fairgrounds Road APPLICATION FOR A COMPREHENSIVE PERMIT UNDER GENERAL LAW CHAPTER 40B, SECTIONS 20-23 Rugged Scott LLC (hereinafter the "Applicant") hereby applies to the Board of Appeals of the Town of Nantucket, Massachusetts, pursuant to General Laws, Chapter 40B, Section 20 through 23, as amended, for the issuance of a Comprehensive Permit authorizing the Applicant to construct 72 single-family homes units on a 10 acre parcel of land running between Rugged Road and Scotts Way, approximately 500 feet east of Fairgrounds Road Nantucket, Massachusetts. The Applicant and the development are more particularly described in the exhibits hereto annexed and submitted simultaneously herewith, all of which are incorporated herein by reference and constitute the documents required to be submitted by Sections 30.00 and 31.00 of the Rules and Regulations ofthe Housing Appeals Committee of the Department of Housing and Community Development. REQUEST FOR FINDINGS OF FACT The Applicant requests that the Board of Appeals make the following findings of fact in connection with the action of the Board on this application: Rugged Scott LLC, which will be a limited dividend organization within the meaning of General Laws, Chapter 40B, is eligible to receive a subsidy under a state or federal affordable housing program after a Comprehensive Permit has been granted. 2. The Applicant has shown evidence of its interest in the proposed site sufficient to qualify it as a recipient of a Comprehensive Permit for this site. MassHousing (Massachusetts Housing Finance Agency), using its Housing Starts program, is an eligible subsidizing agency within the meaning of the procedural regulations of the Housing Appeals Committee (760 CMR: 3 0. 0 1 (C). 4. The number of low or moderate income housing units in the Town of Nantucket constitutes less then ten percent (10%) of the total housing units included in the most recently reported decennial census of the town and reported by the Department of Housing & Community Development as of October 1, 2001, as updated April 24, 2003. 5. The development as proposed in the application is consistent with local needs within the meaning of General Laws, Chapter 40B, Section 20. The applicant respectfully requests the Board of Appeals after complying with the procedural requirements as provided by law, to issue to the applicant a Comprehensive Permit for the development. New Housing at Rugged Road and Scotts Way, Nantucket APPLICATION TABLE OF CONTENTS Cover Letter by Applicant Section 1: Project Summary and Data Summary narrative description of the Applicant, the proposed development, development area and regional and community housing needs. Section 2: Applicant Status Identification of Applicant's status as a qualifying limited dividend organization. Section 3: Site Approval Letter Site approval letter from MassHousing. Section 4: Development Team Identification of members of the development team. Section 5: Site Control and Existin Zg_o11111� • A copy of the deed to the property in the name of Rugged Scott LLC. • Zoning Map for area Section 6: Plans and Drawings (see attached packet of &awings) • Preliminary Site Development Plans • Preliminary Landscape Plan • Preliminary Architectural Drawings Section 7: Department of Housing & Community Development Subsidized Housing Inventory • Current affordable housing inventory (updated April 2003) relative to Town of Nantucket Section 8: List of Exceptions A listing of all exceptions being requested from local land use regulations • Letter from Arthur I. Reade, Jr. regarding exceptions from local regulations. Section 9: Site Engineering and Analvis Report • Site engineering narrative of existing and proposed conditions • Traffic report by Abend Associates (under separate cover) SECTION 1 PROJECT SUMMARY and DATA Applicant— Rugged pplicantRugged Scott LLC, a limited liability company (the "Applicant") is the Applicant for new housing at Rugged Road and Scotts Way and will oversee the planning, development and operating of the proposed development of 72 single family housing units at Rugged Road and Scotts Way in Nantucket, MA ("the Project"). The Applicant will develop the Project on a limited dividend basis, as required under all laws and regulations of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The current owner of the property is Rugged Scott LLC. The Applicant is owned and managed by Rising Tide Fund, LLC, the managing member of which is Rising Tide Development, LLC. The principals of Rising Tide Development are Joshua Posner and Russell Tanner, both of whom have extensive experience in the development of residential communities in Massachusetts and other parts of the Northeast. Many of these residential developments include affordable housing. Under separate cover we have provided background information on Rising Tide Development and its principals. Arthur I. Reade, Jr. is the attorney for the Applicant. The Applicant respectfully requests that all notices from the Board in connection with this Comprehensive Permit Application be sent to Arthur I. Reade, Jr., Reade, Gullicksen, Hanley & Gifford, LLP at 6 Young's Way, PO Box 2669, Nantucket, MA 02584 Description of the Development and Affordable Housing— The preliminary development plan consists of a mix of 40 free standing single family homes and 16 two-family buildings with the appearance of single family homes arranged around a central village green and community building. The addition of a swimming pool is under consideration adjacent to the community building. The architectural styles will be a mix of traditional cottage designs on the island. Homes will have full basements and a choice of 1'/z and 2 story buildings. Buyers will have a choice of various building types that will blend well together within the new community and will be in keeping with the character of other Nantucket neighborhoods and "building with Nantucket in mind." Street patterns will emphasize the quirky and irregular patterns that make Nantucket unique. Landscaping and infrastructure will be of a high quality emphasizing privet hedges and other traditional plantings, private yards and patios for each home. Lot sizes will range in size from 2500 to 7500 square feet. The smaller lots are for some zero lot -line lots for two-family units and therefore will have the same appearance as a 5000 – 7000 square foot lot. Adequate off-street parking will be provided, along with additional on -street parking for visitors and other residents. Affordable Homes at Three Price Levels— The 72 homes will be fee simple and sold in three price categories to eligible homeowners. From the exterior the homes with different price levels will be visually similar, and all price categories will be intermingled within the community. A "local preference" priority will be established for affordable unit buyers which will include those who have been living and working on Nantucket and have been priced out of the real estate market. • Low/Moderate Income. As required under Chapter 40B, 25% of the housing units (18 units) will be sold at prices in the range of $190,000 to $235,000, a level that is deemed to be affordable to households earning up to about $70,000 per year or 80% of the median income for Nantucket. • Middle Income. We propose to sell an additional 13% of the units (9 units) at prices ranging from $273,000 to $347,000 to middle income buyers earning up to about $115,000 per year or 120% of the median. Within the constraints of project economics, we are interested in maximizing the amount of housing produced in this price category because of the special difficulties faced by Nantucket people in this income grouping. • Market Rate. The remaining 63% of the homes (45 units) will be sold without restrictions. Base prices are currently projected to be in the range of $320,000 to $480,000 for a unit in a two-family building, and up to $675,000 for detached single-family homes. It is hoped that the market rate homes will also fill a need for new smaller -sized homes at the lower end of the island's price range. Higher priced home buyers will have the option of purchasing interior finish upgrades in kitchen cabinets, countertops, appliances, flooring, bathrooms, and other features. Summary of Unit Types and Projected Sales Prices Pricing Category House Type No. Homes of Estimated Price Lower Income 40B Attached unit, 2BR 2 $190,000 Attached unit, 3BR 8 $218,000 Cottage home, 2BR 2 $190,000 Cottage home, 3BR 4 $218,000 Cottage home, 4BR 2 $235,000 Total Lower Income 18 Middle Income Attached unit, 2BR 3 $273,000 Attached unit, 3BR 3 $319,000 Cottage home, 3BR 2 $319,000 Cottage home, 4BR 1 $347,000 Total Middle Income 9 Market -Rate Homes Attached unit, 2BR 3 $320,000 Attached unit, 3BR 13 $340,000 - $480,000 Cottage home, 2BR 2 $350,000 Cottage home, 3BR 11 $470,000 Cotta a home, 4BR 16 $670,000 Total Market Units 45 Total, All Units 72 (A more detailed schedule of unit types is included with the site plan documents.) Preliminary architectural drawings, prepared by Design Associates, Inc., an architectural firm located in Nantucket and Cambridge, MA, are attached hereto under separate cover. A preliminary schematic landscape plan for the entire site, as well as more detailed landscape plan for a section of the site were prepared by Weinmayr Associates of Cambridge, MA and are enclosed under separate cover. Preliminary engineering plans prepared by Cullinan Engineering, Inc. of Lakeland, MA and Blackwell & Associates of Nantucket are also attached under separate cover. An engineering narrative is included in the attachments. The Project qualifies as assisted "low or moderate income housing" within the meaning of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40B, section 20 and will provide twenty-five percent of the units (18 units) which meet the definition of low and moderate income under the statute. The Applicant desires to develop this project pursuant to the guidelines of the Housing Starts program of MassHousing, which has provided the Applicant with a site approval letter attached with this application. The units designated as low and moderate -income housing will be sold to households with incomes at or below 80 percent of median income, as established by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The currently applicable maximum incomes are $59,700 for a two-bedroom unit, $68,975 for a three-bedroom unit, and $76,950 for a four-bedroom house (based on 2003 income levels for Nantucket County). Based on a standard formula under Chapter 40B and MassHousing, the proposed sale prices for the low and moderate - income housing units is approximately $190,000 for a two-bedroom unit and $218,000 for a three-bedroom unit. The units have been priced to be affordable to families with annual incomes from about $50,000 to as high as $75,000.The affordable units are very similar to market -rate units in their appearance and will be distributed throughout the proposed development. As noted above, the Applicant also proposes to include 9 Middle Income units at prices ranging from $273,000 to $347,000 for qualified buyers earning up to 120% of the area median income. These Middle Income units have been designed to be affordable to families with annual incomes from about $75,000 to as high as $115,000. Financing for the project will be provided by MassHousing, and the development will be subject to a standard regulatory agreement and deed rider from MassHousing.. Through these documents, the initial sale and subsequent resale of the affordable units is restricted to income - eligible households with sales prices remaining affordable to such households. We propose to put in place a deed restriction to the maximum length allowable, effectively in perpetuity. Site Description— The site is currently undeveloped but is adjacent to existing residential development on three sides. While the site itself is zoned at a low density, property adjacent and nearby is zoned for substantially higher densities. The site has direct access to Town water and sewer, provides vehicular access from three directions, will be connected to a bike path, and is on the shuttle bus route, mitigating traffic impacts. There are no wetlands on the site. Elementary, middle and high schools and the hospital are less than one mile away. The mid -island shopping area is about '/z mile away. The site is located within the designated "Town" district in the Nantucket Comprehensive Community Plan completed on 2000. The Comprehensive Plan is the result of an island -wide planning effort to identify where future development should be concentrated (the "Town' district) and where it should be limited (the "Country" district.) The ability to create affordable housing without government subsidy is tied directly to the ability to build at a greater density than is allowed by zoning. The issue of density however, is often a controversial one at the center of the 40B approval process. In order to help put the discussion of the density of our proposal in context, we have compared our proposal to the density of other high quality neighborhoods on Nantucket. As measured on the basis of buildings per acre, this proposal is comparable to Nashaquissett and Naushop, and somewhat less than Sconset and parts of Town. The proposed density is similar to levels allowed by zoning districts adjacent and nearby to the site. To the east, zoning allows one lot (with two dwellings) per 20,000 square feet or about 4 units per acre; across Fairgrounds Road just 500 feet to the west zoning allows one lot (with two dwellings) per 10,000 square fee or about 8 units per acre; '/4 mile to the north on Fairgrounds Road zoning allows one lot per 5000 square feet (with two dwellings) or about 16 units per acre. The site itself is in a LUG -2 zoning district, which allows one lot (with two dwellings) per 80,000 square feet. Local Need for Affordable Housing— In communities where less than ten percent of the housing is affordable (as described above), the Zoning Board of Appeals must operate under the presumption that there is a substantial regional need for affordable housing that outweighs local concerns. Accordingly, the Board may only deny the proposal or impose significant conditions if it finds that the Project will significantly imperil the health and safety of the occupants or of town residents, or will significantly endanger the environment according to state environmental standards. According to figures compiled by the Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD), on October 1, 2001, Nantucket's subsidized housing inventory consisted of 100 units, representing 2.48% of its total housing stock of 4040. This is below the 10% threshold requirements established in 1969 under Chapter 774 of the Acts of 1969. An additional 310 subsidized housing units are required for Nantucket to meet the 10% threshold. Exceptions and Approvals Requested— The Applicant requests a waiver from those local laws, ordinances, by-laws and regulations that would otherwise apply to the Project and are more restrictive than applicable state requirements. A more detailed list of anticipated exceptions is listed in Section 8 of this application. Conclusion— For all of the foregoing reasons, and for the additional reasons the Applicant will present at the scheduled public hearing on this Application, the Applicant respectfully requests the Board, after complying with the procedural requirements as provided to issue to the Applicant a Comprehensive Permit for the Development. By: Joshua SECTION 2 APPLICANT STATUS Rugged Scott LLC agrees to conform to the limited dividend requirements of Chapter 40B which, in turn, requires that the developer abide by the regulatory requirements imposed by the lending agency for the project. This project is proposed under the Housing Starts program of MassHousing, the Commonwealth's primary agency for funding affordable housing. Rugged Scott LLC will enter into a standard Regulatory Agreement with MassHousing, and all affordable units will be subject to a standard Deed Rider provided by MassHousing. The Regulatory Agreement and specimen Deed Rider will be finalized prior to the commencement of construction. The Regulatory Agreement stipulates that the developer's profit shall be limited to 20% (defined as net revenues from all housing sales no greater than 20% above total development costs). The profit margin will be analyzed by the Monitoring Agent for the lender upon receipt of all sales revenues and project expense information. A copy of this analysis will be filed with the Town of Nantucket upon completion of the report. Any profits in excess of the 20% limit will be forwarded to the Town for use in further assisting affordable housing within the community. SECTION 3 SITE APPROVAL LETTER 0101 ASSNOUSING Massachusetts Housing Finance Agency One Beacon Street, Boston, MA 02108 Tei: 617.854.1000 FAx:617.854.1029 TDo:617.854.1025 www.masshousing.com April 11, 2003 Joshua Posner, President Riding Tide Development LLC 32 Arlington Street Cambridge, MA 02140 Re: Rugged Road, Nantucket PE -104 Project Eligibility (Site Approval) Application Dear Mr. Posner: This letter is in response to your application for a determination of Project Eligibility (Site Approval) pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40B and 760 CMR 30-31 (the "Comprehensive Permit Rules") under the Housing Starts Program (the "Program") of the Massachusetts Housing Finance Agency ("MassHousing"). The proposal is to build 36 single family homes and 18 duplex homes (the "Project") on approximately 10 acres of land on Rugged Road, Nantucket (the "Site"). The land is currently undeveloped and located in a residential neighborhood. This letter is intended to be a written determination of Project Eligibility (Site Approval) in accordance with the Comprehensive Permit Rules, establishing fundability by a subsidizing agency under a low and moderate -income housing subsidy program. MassHousing staff has performed an on-site inspection of the Site and reviewed the pertinent information submitted by the applicant for the Project in accordance with the Comprehensive -Permit Rules. As a result of our review, we have made the following findings: (1) the proposed housing design is generally appropriate for the Site; (2) the proposed Project appears financially feasible within the housing market in which it will be situated based on comparable sales figures; (3) an initial pro forma has been reviewed and the Project appears financially feasible on the basis of estimated development costs; and (4) the developer meets the general eligibility standards of the Program. In addition, it appears that the applicant will be eligible to form an entity or use an existing entity to act as a limited dividend organization in connection with an application for MassHousing financing and a Comprehensive Permit under the Program. AAi*r 11--, r-,- I I r1;-- rh..i.,,,,,., Thi,. 0 Rlonrn.. C--;- n;.o,.r Page 2 Rugged Road, Nantucket PE -104 Staff has also determined that the Project appears generally eligible under the requirements of the Program, subject to final review of eligibility and to final approval. These requirements include the following: 1. The developer must offer a minimum of 25% of the units as affordably priced housing units enabling families with a gross annual income of 80% of the area median income to qualify to purchase the unit under generally accepted mortgage loan underwriting standards. The most recent income limits as published by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) indicate that 80% of the current median family income for Nantucket is $46,880. 2. The affordable units will be governed by a Deed Rider ensuring the units remain affordable to future buyers, for a minimum of 30 years. 3. The developer must be a limited dividend organization and agree to limit the profit on the development to not more than 20% of the project's total development costs. 4. The developer must enter into a Regulatory Agreement with MassHousing and the Town of Nantucket stating specific requirements that must be met to comply with the Comprehensive Permit Rules. 5. The developer must comply with MassHousing's Acquisition Value Policy, which is attached as Exhibit "A". The following issues should be addressed and fully explored in the public hearing process: 1. Whether or not the development will comply with all statutory and regulatory restrictions and conditions relating to protection of drainage, wetlands, vernal pools and wildlife habitats and nearby conservation areas, if applicable to this Site, except to the extent waived by the municipality. 2. Whether or not the development will comply with Title V regulations regarding the design and construction of individual wells, septic systems and wastewater treatment plants if applicable to this Site, except to the extent waived pursuant to Title V. This approval is expressly Iimited to the development of no more than 72 homeownership units under the Program, with not less than 18 of such units designated as affordable homeownership units for low and moderate income persons or families under the terms of the Program. It is not a commitment or guarantee of MassHousing's financing and does not constitute a site plan or building design approval. Should you consider the construction of additional units, you will be required to submit a new Project Eligibility (Site Approval) application for review by MassHousing. Page 3 Rugged Road, Nantucket PE -144 This approval will be effective for a period of two years from the date of this letter. Should construction not commence within this period or should the effective period of this letter not be extended in writing by MassHousing, it shall be considered to have expired and no longer be in effect. In addition, we are requiring that MassHousing be notified at the following times throughout this two year period: (1) when the applicant applies to the local ZBA for a comprehensive permit, (2) when the ZBA issues a decision, and if applicable, (3) when any appeals are filed. If you have any questions concerning this letter, please contact Richard Herlihy at 617-854-1335. Sincerely, Thomas R. Gleason Executive Director CC: Ms. Jane Wallis Gumble, Director, DHCD Francis T. Spriggs, Chairman— Nantucket Board of Selectmen .� 3 Page 4 Rugged Road, Nantucket PE -104 Exhibit "A" Acquisition Value Policy The maximum permissible acquisition value which can be included in the Development Budget for a Construction Loan application will be limited to the lesser of a. the "as is" appraised market value of the land and improvements, as estimated -by the MassHousing Home Ownership Department at the time of loan commitment, and subject to confirmation by an MassHousing-commissioned independent appraisal prior to loan closing; or b. the purchase price of the land and improvements in the last arm's length transaction, if any, within the last three years, plus (i) reasonable and verifiable costs of property improvements made subsequent to the above acquisition and/or (ii) reasonable and verifiable carrying costs related to the land and improvements, such as interest, taxes and insurance. Special Restrictions for Comprehensive Permit Developments In addition to the above -noted acquisition policy, developments which have received a comprehensive permit will be subject to the following restriction: Economic benefits of the comprehensive permit shall accrue to the development and shall not be used to substantiate an acquisition cost that is unreasonably greater than the current appraised fair market value under existing zoning without a comprehensive permit in place. This restriction will be applied regardless of ownership transfers which might take place during the development process. SECTION 4 DEVELOPMENT TEAM New Housing at Rugged Road and Scotts Way, Nantucket Development Team Applicant: Rugged Scott, LLC 32 Arlington Street Cambridge, MA 02140 Attn: Joshua Posner Tel. 617-549-3232 Fax. 617-492-1143 Developer Rising Tide Development, LLC 32 Arlington Street Cambridge, MA 02140 Joshua Posner, President Tel. 617-549-3232 Fax. 617-492-1143 Russell Tanner, Development Manager Tel/Fax: 781-255-1251 Property Owner Rugged Scott, LLC 32 Arlington Street Cambridge, MA 02140 Attn: Joshua Posner Tel. 617-549-3232 Fax. 617-492-1143 Attorney Arthur I Reade, Jr. Reade, Gullicksen, Hanley & Gifford, LLP 6 Young's Way PO Box 2669 Nantucket, MA 02584 Tel. 508-228-3128; Fax. 508-228-5630 Architect Design Associates PO Box 1520 Nantucket, MA 02554 432 Columbia Street Cambridge, MA 02141 Christopher L. Dallmus, Principal Tel. 617-661-9082 Fax. 617-661-2550 Landscape Architect Weinmayr Associates 7 South Street Somerville, Ma 02143 Michael Weinmayer, Principal Tel. 617-354-8700; Fax. 617-492-2725 Civil Engineering Cullinan Engineering, Inc. 10 Riverside Drive, Suite 104 Lakeville, MA 02347 Tel. 508-946-9911; Fax. 508-946-9955 Dan Mulloy, Principal Blackwell & Associates 20 Teasdale Circle Nantucket, MA 02554 Tel: 508-228-9026 Leo Asadoorian, Principal Traffic Consultant Abend Associates 265 Winn St. Burlington, MA 01803 Michael Abend, President Tel. (781) 273-5383; Fax (781) 273-3053 SECTION 5 SITE CONTROL AND ZONING • Deed Attached • Zoning Map Attached BOOK 7 61 PAGE0053 MASSACHUSETTS QUITCLAIM DEED I, Steven C. Jemison aka Stephen C. Jemison, of 700 Forest Street, Denver, Colorado 80220 for consideration paid in the amount of $1,650,000.00 GRANT to Rugged Scott LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, clo Rising Tide Development, LLC, 32 Arlington Street, Cambridge, MA 02140 with QUITCLAIM COVENANTS, those parcels of vacant land situated in the Town and County of Nantucket, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, now known and numbered as 15 Rugged Road, 19 Rugged Road, 8 Scotts Way, and 6 Scotts Way, bounded and described as follows: PARCEL 1: 15 Rugged Road (Map 67/Parcel 170) NORTHEASTERLY by a private way aka Rugged Road, two hundred sixty-two and 92/100 (262.92) feet; SOUTHEASTERLY by Lot 19B in accordance with a plan hereinafter mentioned, four hundred twenty and 14/100 (420.14) feet; SOUTHWESTERLY by Lot 19D on said plan, two hundred sixty-two and 38/100 (262.38) feet; and NORTHWESTERLY by lands now or formerly owned by Marion M. Biggs, four hundred twenty-one and 74/100 (421.74) feet. Being shown as Lot 19A on plan of land entitled `Definitive Subdivision' Plan of Land in Nantucket, MA. Scale 1' = 50', Dated May 26, 1981, Surveyor. Michael S. Bachman, R.L.S.; Engineer. Robert L. Leichter, P.E.; Owners: William D. Jemison, et al. Said plan recorded at Nantucket County Registry of Deeds at Book 21, Page 106. For title, see Deed recorded in the Nantucket Registry of Deeds at Book 191, Page 287. PARCEL 2: 19 Rugged Road (Map 67/13arcel 170.1) NORTHEASTERLY by a private way aka Rugged Road, two hundred a sixty-two and 93/100 (262.93) feet; SOUTHEASTERLY by land now or formerly of Mary Mikolajcik, four hundred eighteen and 54/100 {418.54) feet; SOUTHWESTERLY by Lot 19C on plan hereinafter mentioned, two hundred sixty-two and 38/100 (262.38) feet; and NORTHWESTERLY by Lot 19A on said plan, four hundred twenty and 141100 (420.14) feet. BOOK 7 6 1 PAGE 0 5 4 Being shown as Lot 19B on plan of land entitled `Definitive Subdivision Plan of Land in Nantucket, Mass." drawn by Michael S. Bachman, R.L.S., dated May 26, 1961, and revised August 27, 1981, recorded at the Nantucket Registry of Deeds in Plan Book 21, Page 106. For title, see Deed recorded at Book 393, Page 142. PARCEL 3: 8 Scotts Way (Map 67/Parcel 170.2) NORTHEASTERLY by Lot 19B in accordance with a plan hereinafter mentioned, two hundred sixty-two and 38/100 (262.38) feet; SOUTHEASTERLY by lands now or formerly owned by Judy Thompson, Trustee and Chester T. Scott, et ux, four hundred eighteen and 53/100 (418.53) feet; SOUTHWESTERLY by a private way aka Scotts Way, two hundred sixty-one and 85/100 (261.85) feet; and NORTHWESTERLY by Lot 19D on said plan, four hundred twenty and 14/100 (420.14) feet. Being shown as Lot 19C on plan of land entitled "Definitive Subdivision" Plan of Land in Nantucket, MA. Scale 1" = 50', Dated May 26, 1981, Surveyor. Michael S. Bachman, R.L.S.; Engineer. Robert L. Leichter, P.E.; Owners: William D. Jemison, et al. Said plan recorded at Nantucket County Registry of Deeds. at Book 21, Page 106. For title, see Deed recorded in the Nantucket Registry of Deeds at Book 191, Page 287. PARCEL 4: 6 Scotts Way (Map 67/Parcel 170.3) NORTHEASTERLY by Lot 19A in accordance with a plan hereinafter mentioned, two hundred sixty-two and 381100 (262.38) feet; SOUTHEASTERLY by Lot 19C on said plan, four hundred twenty and 14/100 (420.14) feet; SOUTHWESTERLY by a private way, two hundred sixty-one and 85/100 (261.85) feet; and „-,- NORTHWESTERLY by lands now or formerly owned by Marion M. Biggs, four hundred twenty-one and 74/100 (421.74) feet. Being shown as Lot 19D on plan of land entitled `Definitive Subdivision" Plan of Land in Nantucket, MA. Scale 1" = 50', Dated May 26, 1981, Surveyor. Michael S. Bachman, R.L.S.; Engineer. Robert L. Leichter, P.E.; Owners: William D. Jemison, et al. Said plan recorded at Nantucket County Registry of Deeds at Book 21, Page 106. For title, see Deed recorded in the Nantucket Registry of Deeds at Book 465, Page 227. 800K 7 61 PAGE0055 WITNESS MY HAND AND SEAL, this day of June, 2 2 vin C. Yff Mon STATE OF C'_QLp County of , ss June, 2002 Then personally appeared the above-named Steven C. Jamison and acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be his free act and deed, before me, Qotaryy2Public Ken+- 2 -,US r^ My Commission Expires: NANT(j SND g A!K CERT' CATF Paid y No. ` Date Nantucket County Received & Entered Date: JUN 14.E Tlme: EAS f-ICKET - #'2288} FSE $7524. GO or End of. TTQtr9 f v"..* �,,�,�p x � w �� J. - i � �a� i y v/�� '. �'.r-'�� 4^ '"�,,'` . `�.r"e�aS�t: `) u_. -�-� --- --- -. _sem ,, � � � �_ � �`� � x � � � � �� ' �� M .� 3 �s `,i r r i j�, �� i �' �i `?� �� SECTION 6 PLANS & DRAWINGS (materials provided under separate cover) Preliminary Landscape Plan - Weinmayr Associates Preliminary Architectural Drawings- Design Associates • Unit Plans, typical for each building type • Building Elevations, Typical Preliminary Site Development Plans — Cullinan Engineering and Blackwells & Associates • Cover including contextual site plan showing surrounding area • Existing Conditions Plan • Overall Layout Plan • Preliminary Subdivision Plan • Grading and Utilities Plan • Typical Site Details OOL9-bSS (L 19) ��NON� o Sl��lIN�?Jd ��ldOSaN'd� `G9iV0OGGV ° z N ONI 21J, Mlgffi 3 a z 06L6- 16Z -L 15lu Vv/ 01'Fljquae0 `400JIS u046uiljv Ze z _ 311 gUOWCiOIOAO(] Opll 6ui51-,� o o Q 0o O z 0 z 0 6 O C Qi W LU 0Z U Z 0 Ln LA LA en v � Z 8 C. O NO��p _Np 0000 b ,�ww (A o w N R I" Z I- GQ�� pX [OQNN 0 Z i(�s W �_ w v Z ►- Q �� ooco 2!w--) m F- W > o ao�o:o yv�i� = a d U wy d _ F- j- U •® u ®. 9W V C7 J 114o IL = W M u _ _ Z cn .� _ " z a s .j �_,� zd z o U W ae d Ci W ti 0 a a Q V a a 6 O C Qi W U U Z "-No � '� CA t!f — 0 LA ovNm N u'1 � N LA tt1 n'1 E W Z $ O `^ �. 0 VfOO�N NO'vA cc _� O 7 z 0 F' �Q.�Od $QNN Z W L U $ Q r=I ' Ewoo 2 LY ~ Lu H wtt v82 E a= W a-4 = O 0 m W W U U O ° _ (A Iru Z a°C. 1 a �� _� z U W O. OC W Z aCLO Q Q & o VC J a �I 0, 4 P. O U W � U Z �'—NO v� ao v) O V'NOp N VI vN E O W 7 g C O H O 01 N N — xp 00co Y/ 0 b wy7 0 F.. .�pp � Q 0 pp Op Q N N N Z L p z u z F' Q E�n� a0m a W — uj 3 W > W (4.0 N wi W 1w V L7 O J W N w o 0 V W U Z a 0.Lim J W 0 ac ac CL aC p Q 0 Q g 4 O P 6 G V400 9 !0 l z 44�a PM4 H W PO4 a z a w a PM4 ZZ if Z0Z 1Bd21 P4 O w 0 z 0 x NOISIA36 A z 44 0310N SY 11Ldtl ci ro a n lP"Rd0- 3n3a 3411 JNISIN HOA a3NVd3Nd S113snHOVSSVN '13N0f11NVN ,kVM S1100S ONd OdOH (139ond 80J ONisnOH O3SOdOHd 133HS 213A00 ww-�Wsa gra i nno v� yro �emr o� � wet ecu'_ avVe ova �yaa-°a� v� tww� wZrrbiwna mr a O bOb Y111YIIYM if 111YWF OM � naaunno�no�n • nivansri - noanon - nnenn• u lu �17tI2I��II��t� ti ��t��trrin�cJ J z ¢ c U CLCL O RZR S 0- v Y p QLLJ C7 Z z O = n 8 1 �W O &�ro 2 zzI�NN`' q , Z J Sao Z US C-) j»W = �l U O F'2 PS � �QIp N Jd � r. n Z� Cz 2 U < ep LL' z LLI gz W n ry w .- N M •f to t0 VA W 0 Z z Z Q J CL W fn a v z d N 0 F z f7 z w z - 0 ~m 0 } J Jz ¢ o a z N 5 N Q w a a to F F to D _) p ¢ Q Q p J ? ¢ a C) ww-�Wsa gra i nno v� yro �emr o� � wet ecu'_ avVe ova �yaa-°a� v� tww� wZrrbiwna mr a O bOb Y111YIIYM if 111YWF OM � naaunno�no�n • nivansri - noanon - nnenn• u lu �17tI2I��II��t� ti ��t��trrin�cJ J z ¢ c U CLCL O RZR S 0- v Y p QLLJ C7 Z z y � Z y O = n 8 1 �W O &�ro 2 zzI�NN`' q , O J Sao Z US C-) j»W = �l U O F'2 PS � �QIp N Jd � r. n Z� Cz 2 U < ep LL' z LLI gz W n ry CL U OJOZ S113Sf1H3VSSVY4 '13>lOfUNVN AVM SuoOS aNv avow amour 80.4 ONISnOH a3SOdONd NVId SNOLLIONOO ONLLSIX3 r ct B 1 1 I I I I 12 / / - y / 'Tk 3 , v � avow - - `-- -_- - ,os r ct B 1 1 I I I I mm-rWmo x- lw arm" 'aro aom a ow -.W". xv olltrmm vn 'wloo�' v w,vwawm an ML 21Y1 lw-ilr/q wb Yll %rmly '�{ ra.Yn ppt N11N11NNOV99tN' 1711ANNt7 NO1N0■ NNNNN• Juni m Imflo 12 / / - mm-rWmo x- lw arm" 'aro aom a ow -.W". xv olltrmm vn 'wloo�' v w,vwawm an ML 21Y1 lw-ilr/q wb Yll %rmly '�{ ra.Yn ppt N11N11NNOV99tN' 1711ANNt7 NO1N0■ NNNNN• Juni m Imflo -----)2 / \ '1. N A l SILOOS 1 / 1� 12 - JI 03JJ/1M 1// / R R -----)2 / \ '1. N A l SILOOS 1 / 1� 9 30 f LZIfZOZ ,09 - ,l 133H5 7 M38WfIN 103f`Oild rv00 V OW _ IUN --_ I fOOZ 'Of ll?JdV N "�nOO ry w w O ao r r m m oao o o o o O� �a a Q< w h h YOI M ZZ ,j: m a r Z wp N o m NI ^ N ZZ2 VI ZNz J Z�ZW �¢¢�O ❑oma w ju0id <3< z o< <o ON Z S �� F to a n m< ia° N U h N VNj Na Ww ¢ R z z ❑p N <p ❑ OU n �� cpio i 6��W ry 1'1 O n qaa O oW ua w O i FIX 0.<5 w 2 z Wa< m F- Z om � o ^ ❑ VI ❑ a� ^off ❑ R Z N� Z� V w yW UZ<VI z wz< F Oz Ki <ZW m O VI? z OW �� < N _ <w m m Z << 0.1 oiX¢ ol uZO <60 d o 3P o w 8� ; ..." < z N �¢du j�v�-i �o o� Oi� z Oa< ya�z ni ^o NN wz¢ <❑ m, k NO zo aV �� V zm zm o WUmN am W< az oW �< pq M < it zW <Z z N Z C<�� W�VW {V/1 L] Nb <W yy= Z� < �Y yy �� V 20 Z4 ZpU < �V ?V w -0i ¢zN? Lia N� zz <am S� o k+a Ma IW -zo WWV95 �<Z C VZZIZ �ZZ = <Z9 O1� O� F~^ y 1� ,,<QZ< 2<"'W<yZ1m Vlw 1-05 oo OVWI OV SN -M6 wSU^ KW <. y SOW (<� O WO �y Z`N-'WZ Z1�[��53❑ `NVI V N< 2N �(-BZW �m� 30 = ZOm$ HICi' NV VIZ <VIYC aWlr U(� ❑VZOI w V1WZ W RY FY2 00 OE NN awzz w N~Z Vx14 (M11ZH iIQ FOWW ZWC x< xZ Wz aV W4w 1JF VIZ r x S 2R=< F Z F �Z viz .0 mLi< n.V cdf mzm oma 33MS NQLONnw JNISIN S113snHOVSSVV4 '13>ioniNVN J,VM S1103S 0Md GVMJ 03oon8 80J ONisnOH 03SOdO8d NVId inoAdi IIVN3A0 ZD 7 OX r mZ wK rca �m� b� o<W Nm UZO OOW2a ?r <ZW ^ 7 Z� OmOmz yW �g Dia 4w um iWi ZXKa N< u< R z*Y S o ~ 3EO 99lh11i/t0L 'l1Yf IW iO4 LKtC ♦11 ']i1Y]YYl iwi imlo�w 01 t 9M-/[f/Lli ]IY{�p 9/L1i 9Kip VI1 Yg1tW "Ni MITIIWGIwO� 0p1 D ML9- - i0S lOGW TI TYMM "Li MMM OOi 1' t � a t11ttI1YYYttY11' 1111AttYl tO1tOt tYll tllY N �KI2I��HI��I� N F��izzn�cJ w lo1J� fA V ry w w O ao r r m m oao o o o o O� �a a w h h YOI M ZZ ,j: O N r Z wp N o m NI ^ N V H ❑oma r Z U U U F N n U ❑ w and N U h N VNj < N M 0 N N_ 4 ❑ O ❑ OU o N� i i i ❑ ry 1'1 O n O w O Z o w O WJ N V R 2 o N a J< 2 z 4 N F- Z O m � V) j ❑ VI OJ N a� > Z ❑ R Z Z � Z ZD 7 OX r mZ wK rca �m� b� o<W Nm UZO OOW2a ?r <ZW ^ 7 Z� OmOmz yW �g Dia 4w um iWi ZXKa N< u< R z*Y S o ~ 3EO 99lh11i/t0L 'l1Yf IW iO4 LKtC ♦11 ']i1Y]YYl iwi imlo�w 01 t 9M-/[f/Lli ]IY{�p 9/L1i 9Kip VI1 Yg1tW "Ni MITIIWGIwO� 0p1 D ML9- - i0S lOGW TI TYMM "Li MMM OOi 1' t � a t11ttI1YYYttY11' 1111AttYl tO1tOt tYll tllY N �KI2I��HI��I� N F��izzn�cJ w G mN w w O ao r r m m O m m w h h YOI M ri Y N om N V H ❑oma a to r n N n ❑ w and N U h N VNj < N M 0 N r O o t0 Y U O ri m^^ ry 1'1 O n O w U O w O WJ N V R 2 2 Z ❑ R 1 R � z Z< a< m < LL 4 N G pU U k m< OV z i 1 W _ m m Z w i o a w 1.� < z z I-aw a ii 3 o m a ❑ N Z < a Z h1 G mN om V H ❑oma a to r n N n ❑ w and M lY \ o N o < V Z U V a N a m a� FYa 1 z Z< a< m o LL 4 N G pU U k m< OV z i 1 W _ Z w " a . 133H5 W00 OWl 1 lads t� n 1 i ll /f od0(v (HLaM 3WYRIYA — 31YAW Y < W W m N 4 2 f'5 0z LS w * IN a as ,04 - ,l 118dY s -- - _ .,.+ ' Priv T r. -F,.Uf rlv- L UdLS NMVNnw L MId 3M IMOMA30 3OIL ONISIa p a0d MlYdMd S113snHOVSSdW '13A0niNVN AVM S110OS 0NV OV08 0309na 2l03 9NisnOH 03SOdO8d NVId NOISIAIaens A8VNIW113N J z. ��...III K � m <II yNW _7 -JE _z lm Z � •• VI b 64} M vi 00•} < I41 n r U W < 25 16 N �' m < N Z m U z N z O in M �aOd, I� i JJJ +, n c%r 4 �i m 41 44 e } ** � 41 of 999 *g , } - I� * N bi 4+ 4404 tl rf 4tit � O sx } N M ,Yt 7B} %ICI * * *41 n q o '� m rf OQ N 9 �• ROW�w y* ^ r igqif * ♦ 'T A� A ' H 41 C4 }-UQ111M7' {Ay gig 19 N 31•} 00•} < I41 n r U W < 25 16 N �' m < N Z m U z N z O in M 111'}o JJJ +, n c%r *g i, 9r io ,Yt 6't * n q 9 ROAD D 41 Ix r� 6S3 4I i�{ v i. 0 *4 m yN 41 15 Ih * g T.112 it �♦ <' C4 *.9f �Z9 i.tiZ f'1 Q m OIm m Q it O cj � $ r � 1fW ( f N ,� yM OUM 37B MA - XYMW S1100S U < � yw< U W < 25 mZUO~ � nZY- L) < N Z m U z N z O in us cu r . vn �aaoa�"M� f wiiwcwm m. v o V.eo ori �w-tta�°ia weu �w rwrn y wnm ees aaaaaaaoraar■ • awouri - aoaaoa - aaaanr N V W m =c- o z WN 7 0.LO m = m Q� Wj� p�I b Zww o yyU �K �2 Kp. O NZ W+< ?xa ZSKz <a0Z gym N^m WU ZJ<p O m0 N N m << U a < 2KY IfV 0z IFr a0K 0 10 vlaJJ 882 � a U W �W0 WI- OW LK �N rc za X p Z N K� ?K WZz -z- <U; z00 W Wwm0 NZ W,z OW 0 K� WOK N3 QZWI� Ny 2 o U J�W �J W2z �z < o h �' ao3 w� wR'' �'z z "? Xa nnK.w �m bio A tV YI M N b �u w Z �~ g U c�5 ww�W:)< 01 r 0 N K * WO><K3K F-H�QWx� ��ggll oOWK.ZKw 70•t %N o 1 = K m cry K 3 41 30 r W I` �! a g o " N 't 2 O U 9 jo 9 133HS I LZ ITZOZ 838VMN 103rOHd✓100 I .0i, - L I orn I 18dll I 100Z 'OE 118dY a6e110 4 Rd 0 s Otizo Ho.q a3HVd3Hd WL OM '.LN3ndO'MUO :3GM—%ffCU W, wormm ZE I IAIAI SH3snHOVSSVV4 '13>ilon0i3NVN ..U.....IIIOVI -3 MCIOCI UMMgAV AVM SLiOOS ONV OV029on8 ?JOJ ONisnOH (13SOdO8dMflo NVId S311nin (INV ONIOV4 P� te UR a ffi.lqi- �., 9 i Ian z N 2 ello) A ass �5 2N rz d 4 -low z z z z . . I F= r F=F= . . F r F: In . . X I, I, I, � 2-1 2g " R 51 Z *z<:3 4:3 o Apil (PUM "rMVA X a6e110 4 Rd 0 s Otizo Ho.q a3HVd3Hd WL OM '.LN3ndO'MUO :3GM—%ffCU W, wormm ZE I IAIAI SH3snHOVSSVV4 '13>ilon0i3NVN ..U.....IIIOVI -3 MCIOCI UMMgAV AVM SLiOOS ONV OV029on8 ?JOJ ONisnOH (13SOdO8dMflo NVId S311nin (INV ONIOV4 P� te UR a ffi.lqi- �., 9 i Ian N 2 ello) ass -low Z *z<:3 4:3 o Apil a6e110 4 Rd 0 s Otizo Ho.q a3HVd3Hd WL OM '.LN3ndO'MUO :3GM—%ffCU W, wormm ZE I IAIAI SH3snHOVSSVV4 '13>ilon0i3NVN ..U.....IIIOVI -3 MCIOCI UMMgAV AVM SLiOOS ONV OV029on8 ?JOJ ONisnOH (13SOdO8dMflo NVId S311nin (INV ONIOV4 P� te UR a ffi.lqi- �., 9 i N 2 ello) Apil X 9 Z 1 ap Slel VtlL cw a3WdOM 3WHM 3Dv A vm iU;k—MMVA — 3LVA&W S1100S Y, co a L,. N _o I k�m N z z 2 ello) P6ello) VtlL cw a3WdOM 3WHM 3Dv D A vm iU;k—MMVA — 3LVA&W S1100S Y, co a L,. N _o I k�m N z z 6L d0 L W00 vG O w ri) z 44�04PO4 w w EM4 NOI1dlHOS3a A w O P4 0 1:4 P4 IOCZOZ 838WnN 103ro8d I a31ON SV 31VOS OitZO St, RHOYMMI 'M` alvemJ 1332LLS NaLONnuv s3a Booz •sz AavnNvr OM '1MMOMAM 3dOLL ONISIN 31V0 N0ISIA38 3nssl 31va S-L13snHOVSSVV4 '13>ionlNVN AVM S11o0S aNV OV08 0300n8 1V 1N3WdOl3A3a IVI1N33aIS38 a3SOdOHd 133HS 83A00 A z El 4� V 4-J 0 Cd 0 N w U) N i14 P4 z v t— A ..R z 5Z g C9 Z nae Y11 ]vo ]OelD1VY a ax-elVo xv[a` °eae� �oiawiro�wm aw Yxq Y11 /MWF 'L IIxx11Y eDi a f a Y f l[ffxxf•f evx • ■171Afftl - 401f08 - ■Yfff• �KI2I��Ao J U N W v t— A ..R z 5Z g C9 Z M I � N aY, O H C9 O la Fz7 a aZo Nwr a amen a a n n �2 o�ao (a a � i r V) O O .- N M '•t 00 Ol Q�-w0 rc a W C K m W Maar, z ate= z o < s =Z<2 Y z gTmN X w w �sz� Z 3 z o d W z = � �U um 2 W di V 0rn a a } o ir _Z o Y aCL M M Z zo g a a Q g a a o a w z < rn z z CL a a V),.J J g 5 0 a o a z4 F o z :3 w zz z o ~ O W J z OO _ c) o vm=i ° ° a o c r z a F m 3 a 3 z W Q 3W a z U W O a K w N 0 U v t— A ..R z 5Z g C9 Z 6t AO t-MovZOz 1:� Id I •O4 = .t 31VOS Ortzo-sit nHoymn mamenvo IMHLS NO.LDNnip 9ooz v kavnMA OM IN3ndOI3&30 3aLL ONISRI 3LVa a0.1 a3VVd3ad -ON 3LVa S113snHOVSSVW 'iDon1NVN ,IVM S1109S ONV 4V08 039onH 1V 1N3Wd013AM lVUNMIS38 a3SOdONd NVId SNOIDONOO ONIlSIX3 9 �.•a C NZ�V{ A N I W N <xJ U / ZZ a z<zo %f t- � a arN m K M _.'''at•3� m � W a o1 O a a�ao z�awz I.wjW<� may1Q� nz O p •-' 0 z aoz o ory "arc VVZ _ Ha b <Z Z azw UN -ow �w O w J M Z / o 'z z <Z []Q 4 o < " rci< K2 o ww ZZ ow F� / ci Ww- za m Na U. NX < OL 0z o UZU ] am Y p \ V1 maul m <U QZ �^ <US Z �W z2 a zmaD *Z z_o oJ< mWl Q=m oz� rn €io �O 2 R, <0 <VI ZOS <2 p• Uwe o0w O~^� Z. <�a �� =vwi ZWa a� o 8 x' <Vtom -�o "m< <� m o W WWw W,< FW X00 < ~F-u5mZ FOO N� , MY SwZ O.. W� w0W �mn sWZ X Fz COIN �w F- n U �' rj� «m Ono. 9 �.•a C NZ�V{ A a3oony Iw1tiw111 tvi � two .w ire aemw m ; to av t�if o�vn toiw'aw laivr+owvu oa a m w1u vn trrn u xrrm Iei 6 . x ......Gull • 21111U1t1 - ■aloof ■I odaw r bk4 n z b kw n b "'F_.....51 •a \ `\ E` q i Vpla3 33LI ums, de �• 131HLSIO 13X3(lLNVN !/N Ut-L9 A vm U z S110�S �a z o N I W N <xJ U / ZZ a z<zo %f t- � a arN m K M _.'''at•3� m � W a o1 a a�ao z�awz I.wjW<� may1Q� nz =Z¢Z b g=m amu, azo -... �UNm a3oony Iw1tiw111 tvi � two .w ire aemw m ; to av t�if o�vn toiw'aw laivr+owvu oa a m w1u vn trrn u xrrm Iei 6 . x ......Gull • 21111U1t1 - ■aloof ■I odaw r bk4 n z b kw n b "'F_.....51 •a \ `\ E` q i Vpla3 33LI ums, de �• 131HLSIO 13X3(lLNVN !/N Ut-L9 A vm U z S110�S �a z o 6L d0 £ OOI-OI-LZIO£ZOZ 133H5 OYII I orn 1ed-8 NOISIA38 0 Z on O W Z C yy �3tr O �i� �U33ZO 33aa F- � N [[[..... o o j5 o �] UUzz ACU r. 00 O !O x � 0 � -a2do Ad I 0310N Stl I orlao 31tl0S 9002 '£ A8tlnae3j ('!'S 009'£) 1N3rGSV3 V3iJV iN3YI39YNVY1 1V119VH- '.....................• avoa a£ 2 ulSi 'K ^=i .�.�'.Wtt.Y TL l L.[! YII •■ L.■Y1■ .l P �L" rr1 t L Wp loll /pltl ']�Y IrtZIJ■IIpIrN pp. a W-�1/.0� ImW 1�11.IIW1Y L NMI■N 0a ■aL■rexerrrr■ • ■iit�■■rt - ■ea■e■ • ■■■�nr o N Mi N "o o 'ON 3Ltla ODU'' O S113snHOVSSVH '13AonlN`dN M U m O 0 V 2 OJ mW m P Q Z kVM SUMS ON`d OdON 039onN O> O W F oda a O a>> m n n iV 9NISf10H 03SOdOHd HOA 1N3WdOl3A30 311S < 0 I a: 00 g O O WQ Nbld NOISIA1aens 3AIlINl334 lIV83AO a UJri^ b^ m w W < J fir' o m ma0 <o� a Z z ., w < o =Za2 < y��l yobl Z. W F W W O z W p W Z F?V S U N m 2 2 < 6 Y Z tj VO O o! 27 p� >> zm z3a macro m OF < W (A € N d� O WmU U00 oo mo M('n m<LLd oa 2 << Vr-¢ �p<w Qyt F -a wm Om< Zp� o o_ O�\ o' � W �wyztl Y~<W NUZZO OF yt wU2< OvfO O�md. W �Om <QO 9W2a' «Z Oo0 K - N 4��0 'Nmbmn WN <2<Z OOI z 'ma F< m Ow FZ o 3W < �2 Z o 0Wo ovWiV ��m> NFz mrzo <OF r€mto-il 20Kzw �a� mad o z < 2 mm W rc 7w<omo 2 < J> (Y >2 �K7OW aO 9Nu WON86 5t0/I= W W mom~O u-UOz o� p and t' -W mo�LS W�2 y� z >Oa o<.- m N w mW�l tna <TOQut V< m W O xw ma ¢ Z. J02aJ FUOUr` ow no no<� =0? <2�W my Zo�W <WOV Q mm� a W O J ¢ QO m F t- m F O V m a z z O p O m< a Z U a ti O 'z Z 0 2 K o W C W O J O J 0 2< m W �J mNu NN•r22 MF�JFW 'a N > p<pm0 ��.01 f/1 W0l.�}2 UY O YW �aV<a •-m m <N z O<mD FZ i3 QOw UFn< a W 5"m 0<10 1a1 U<1- iptT�l3� m<<maUV m- W 2 0p02 00< oJ< F W 2 �� h W 2 z Uu N O O Q Z Q QpUVaI ~p 0 0 VU m'.< ~ w W Q o of<oma >O H 2< O �0K< Wl-�z W m W F O QObVIK 1-pW, W < hW d z~UjQo 0 W t� N�W!-K • • HmOp ZVl 2 m wz< poi}ao o>u �o�wm r<-oawx m ^ Naz 'i OOEw0m13< 1aJ N FVm17KN J 2 ulSi 'K ^=i .�.�'.Wtt.Y TL l L.[! YII •■ L.■Y1■ .l P �L" rr1 t L Wp loll /pltl ']�Y IrtZIJ■IIpIrN pp. a W-�1/.0� ImW 1�11.IIW1Y L NMI■N 0a ■aL■rexerrrr■ • ■iit�■■rt - ■ea■e■ • ■■■�nr o N Mi N "o o Q O n ODU'' O M U m O 0 V 2 OJ mW m P Q Z � O> O W F oda a O a>> m n n m w O �wa0 1 < 0 I a: 00 g O O WQ 2 C5 W a0- �'<'d aww w UJri^ b^ m w W < J z m p 7 m m< ma0 <o� a Z z ., w < o =Za2 o N z W02 SWmm lWYJ J Y p� WWz W J aa,UU a?o U U Z N � o d S U N m Z< Z 0 W a 0 n m o w r O W .. ..... .......... w <O 2 a < a3aana U WQ 2 C5 W NU J O UJri^ b^ m ' - »J*r IJO'0 'jam W W d So m 0 Q w o Z toil N a0 0 V 2 z z O o z z n m o m o O WZV 9oro ......................... .. ..... .......... w <o a zo a3aana N<o� ' 1-wu0 m mmU I a p 7 m m< N < no (03Nn9V3M .£Z'90= S9'4L9 � u z < Y ■ • 68003tl A'90 .0S. 90 SLI 1�1� 3.91•.LZ£9S rn; _. 90 L£SiS .OL'YSI�� _ : ��Jll voio�voimmvoi voi a0 voianNuoian':-'voinnuoi '�C M-r•� 3.90.L'1..M1. .61.7.11 b1 . 99 r • • ItV CJN N.��CJ CJ cVNN�fV Nty�tVN�njN t.: 3,9o,LZ.£95 ,asrof .L911 'M•0'LJ R .( •S Oil/.19; X-01, 1N3Y43SV3 32JV 1N3Yl1DVNVW .� ' omnmmaoNooN mNnnnama to [To I —_ —_ '� h lVlle NaLVMNHOI5 1�• N O m O N v) N <n N n mqn ^ n NN O m yr mmm NN PtOmmgZq mq W. M ~\m� ' �� W 1p � ' '�+ 4J O Vl O}� •Ni• <l4 li lr li tr�LL4w4ti Ali l4 ti LL 4 w LL L': L': n jm7 • b I < / (S��j I�.• IO '� d I•F O z• VI VJ VI VJN VJ t/I VI VI VI In U1NV11N to VIV1t/J tN to b Z��w • b m< ( < nd ^ ^dd�� r� W • bNntnpNmtnD OtnO qmi tN.bOn NamOnN�YaIN • I <W4 W VVV111 bd = ^dI•oo•-r�a�i+)aam ONbn.-rinn 'Rai tb • • ovi ttiroanvi vim tricuiri�avi vi<vi vi a . Mn7b V y� �0•6L W . �U<U<U<�I�I�I M O f`! I n ly 0 I lea i(] a < EO fV NNiO l� n I 3~ttil Z / -- I < N. -b I nm0 I bn obton obvLq q 3 —:me tn< Fd z. Al.L9.6L6fNI Q I --1C LL�4 9Y•L1 w / 4 a : w Nom I no. I uninmmNNmmaNaaN ; ,, d t a I vvvJJJ I o. 9t'O z• I : = O .ZC•99 3.zs.6Lefs �� ; Nn avlbnmrno�Nn<nbnmPp N N . rid 00 ��QQQ N N N N N N N N nn n n n n n n nn O `1 a Jfu ! dd p 'L=1 �F • obo�M °ooN otn0000000000°m � �• • LV yJ 3911G19S WTw.� • •N NamnNmvinNlNtm`iNdolNriti�ic3�' • •< tV tV NtV NtVN� m \'°:b : z �d �W �• • o Iwr / •Z6 ply'^ �' y �+ Iia i��: c<i avwi z�M$_ t S�►^ LL <b ' OOiO<mb <y ON MNNYN<NO aOm v OJ • . ul z I eud d vJ ''� �� amrnnm•-nnmN N. Nn m m b O�"b IZWIA,^,J ��tY�,;Yi q� 1 �d �v •�NNIVn NYI^�- IC VI yid ca . . Izw aN <�,j I '�b6 eo._ $ 2 . • a 5" Cd z \� • • rWn O 3 •� 4 .10'99 • ; wli li44LL w4V.li4wwtiw44w14 ti4 p QZ m / ..d rI vi 41.z1.Zfef r - • VJ VI uI NiooO i 0666VJNVJVI uI VJ ul VI41 • • IQ< Wd m m 9C• L1 ••• •. M•.• a Nmm bPm Ol�Nmulma mNNmnbnu) < < W I = ^o .••••.•. nmm mMm.-t�Ol�mm Nl(ImNP•fnQm W • • '�6 O s�.Lyit6f9' • . • • •..• •.•..• • bmmn _ x �.- � • to^amm�maaamaan.-aamboP m a • •. . .... .. • ..ki `.•. wt`L(j..••....� i • Zvi natri<�bvi�od tri��t3via p mtWn q •�Sg6 • \ 3r9tff '!.y L 1�ryylv��$ W1 W d • g I q w w .trt , rMStlStl olSYt<t. ... �F NNW .. .. •; <mmNonooaoo_:oN nnm�o no SN Zl'0•$.. ri f yJ % �" • ••� .•W.� oN0000noNmON o omn o • �� / ••..•.. .. a;. • •.• �•.•• AI t(�� O • • •• ��pmOOd OtMp OCJOuINddt]tp Oi m �W ii•• •.• �•.....R.1m • •..��.. • ks tfSG W ar� u: • •• �^ NmNNm Nultynn N�^NNNmm U O . • N VJ • w N55V6'31'w< =d -Od 93116 2 Ml •• O.-'Ml^vIb'mPO.- < QQ • ll�.l.yyrryy4 \ •Qr� •.'d � � LL O d •• �^NMambn mP NN 3 17 o �• ; Om .C9yat �\ tQt •moi I� .•] rZ Hd W � � 4.?S 160• o • • mz� [] m c ; �n 3i9.ti ......... ... 9 /.... .. • oaklm x of �z%• • t • •....7td•.• •• ••.• ;• oumr<•t<.l o€laW W p b • . 9\ W ,...• • 06w UI/17W 2 F mW nze< ; •8g ay w W to 'r' •'n ;r FF'moQao zo3 w�2W .�y If�.!.�ll.. p 1�O.jJI d • ' w3 z w x z _7yj do f mJn O-�Op= W= O;U >8 �I <� `w 1fi J d J`ad 6y 34 6� : -'w� o_oFo mFnw a�w rfd 3 66.34 170• • <>>'FFFdtmil Wztr mem : w "<_ o �� O Z W : dd ='M.tJ: .r N62312 w }1- yt`j ro ; yj <N¢zaao rcaxw JZN ryC20'E 4vi yl ;b n • z<�W w aaV Amo • \ 8 96 � I i din. td• <�oo?F w. -De wW3 0 • Yl t0• W O W U W 1,, 40.06 wd YY ow nd j`w coi��oV<m> �3o toil �'�^si r I� 9\frs i ti R.O.W. 20rw 166.63, ( b? 90,0 nmmaw cmmi3-_ "mwwmom n mm oz a 60.16 1 • JZ'Wtnozzo wo<< Wa<' • n r te''— 7 w0<o: wz<U do l 3 F'Vi • tod / • •ye zz<m • C�rSi • tj.\ � �pp �/ • ; �FFOl og aim )T37 <x o w Zw w d zoo�J<y,z �-"FJy"a �w�a rc .�• • • i7 •..•1� • •...0 •.....• .6; • • 01'D_'KFOQ< <XW < W < •• • •• • 1 �i .[Z' 1 �m•• • • zaaWtnJ�z 3wo� m�o� a M,/S ty _ n 4d 46 moo• o o i< • • to t Lfp 1< '$w 1'11 �' • m rJ\mi :: r $ 77ll N M.tpl6tt X 1.91 CD .6; mz< �• • Imo.~ K 9 4641 �2�It2 • : > wo �.tD. S d ��1l S y, 'ii. pp.16 126• • • o a coi W w< wzi N < 2 �� : _ .9p I•iN �� K t�y/�� N62'3� w tyre, • g • ' • '^ <w 5 -d • b6 Id N .q.Y ......... :• •...... X.• •$ •! • p p�ao oW„ ;• ... �. •i� •`� Z5S ' y�, • `°o cW�o o'.'��'' cF- :6ic.l�' a . ............. ..... • 8\ a$� ..sJus i 1 � : a W 'mz �rcko ozrc a • lei�, No Ts : 2� na ao96 azo w i. try 9 1� 4; mm •:i C o o r: < 8 K N m w z V ' m Q �$41•pt�L{'�,4- 6 N nd �1 :�s ocwYi an yaizoZ'+�O' 'o Wlaa\"+tr }p, .VvjoR 4A �U j •~ Em2z d2a is 2! <PQ �W : 1` JJtttt'ODDOd OQ S a` N ��{�4 Q l 106• 'n° »wo z< z a a8 z� N < v a a Od \a 0 � I 2 <n off' *Now icwz L) ~z Mbb 64 ?�own F<�z oacFi ooi <<F •ODpf `ii'N ■IIS, d tad wNw zFv<l Zozwrn crop' 2w '° add wo< o<zm Yl.w n d� r� b L` 562'34 ' ��.. ovz-i� we'aj.o Jza zw �\` • <d, < i� {., 14� M� `r��'p< fA +ial jj'�� a'- 2y to- n2i • ;<w / Cf N rd ' on I o "� 66.9' a^a W�� Oaf~� Kw �o rcz N<<<«<M $ rn nd 2 a�"I y�-licW�om ��"rc <w <d to h w '! mea W�a Woaoo �w. o< o wo ' M•»teZ6£ fi 99'OL AL Fi FL 6i'Of 90'99 c Mi 6 v b .09'£11 M.ff.em"N ar 7r .99'96 3.ff,6af9s '� IM ,09'£01 a ' m Ae'o6 7 ' 90'0 : w 3.".60.iSS : 's On ag r"joy e DilDi o I y LL (-_4-S 9L0•t) 1N3N3SV3 V3NV 1N3Y13OVNVYI 1tl118VH S-11 0 0 $ I T •.......................• N m •••.•.•.••.•.••.•...•.•.•........••..•.•.•.•.•.•.•..•.••••.•...••..•..•...•......ej ... z O V3lH3YIV AO SinoAOB a 0S 33L11YIYI00 $ 1O01LS10 13W3nLNVN d/N 4 6L d0 b133HS i138Wf1N 1O3f0ild 001-OL-LZLO£ZOZ 1310N SV 31tlOS ottro s,1 FHOYMMI !Mi QpjeM 1173NLC NM Nnw Z£ I W N W F /HMI 0Wl 0W 18di1 9002'£ 1.mvn863d O'n 'li'WOMAM 3OLL ONGIN Oj<j O YHO aNOLL&HOS3a Sia 1103 a3VVd311d S113snHOVSS` Vi '13>ionlNVN AVM S110OS (INV GVOH 039on8 ld 9NisnOH 03SOdO8d 803 1N3WdO13A34 MIS L NVId NOisimiens 3AWNIAO + NOISLUN 'ON 31VOo Z W < W V 7 W z�Q <d}7 �pWp,, QO M m omen p � o av �o W� O� m m M < r a O Y < =�a4z411 v o ymy� Q�Q O< Zp 7 Q p .pI- on z< Z Y N ZZ z g w m m 252 �� da'OU W W OJ m m � 00)- U N m 00 2 m r Z W V Z�• a W op, WWOa J< Z a€W3 0 p � o O�Z <r�o <OF ■ 7 m3¢ w U Z O Z 1- a a in } aZ � rc� Z. �}OZ 9<m <o�"opvN yap a o 1'^WW<ou F^ou 1 o a w< n0 ��uu �<Qu� I- Lc'r-rl r �� yvi a ��v■ t�aao■ w a'■aoi a 91111 13 IjAlf e�is� �n� sue °ia wm iw rrr •u wrm eot uan■■er�w■ � •iveuri • ■ea w■ - ■rn■n• o ��tI2I��KI�K� N 0 I W N W F <YJ < Oj<j O Z � Or azo Z W < W V 7 W z�Q <d}7 �pWp,, QO M m omen p � o av �o 0 0 i a-< 1 o < r a O Y < =�a4z411 v o :D <o mwmp 1. Q?O= Z p Q � z< Z Y N ZZ z g w m m K Wwy O J � UZ da'OU U VWj 00)- U N m 00 2 m r Z W V O < r Y2 U O V W } U u) SU O'v��mM 3W yW� QQZpO a mz C) i a?w wwioo 0. p z p ma -=Z,Z<" F 7o z <OprG K < a O z U N m oZ<m< wyy� m V)Q �j y<W�W m�QUYU mmg r m �>tt<� m<Z Fa Z ZO QO IANW8 W Q pw 6 Z< K 0 0 ZZ_ N O - Z 7 W O K O} i Q z _J J U W O U W m <=m}i 7mW O VI,<L0 J pJ�vf�/1� Or W w=<WZO . : � N �IAiKN Q 0 K r O 0 W m Z Q } W p W yl rZ J Or ;,z Z W < W V 7 �pWp,, QO fA OQ 0<3 S U p < < U � m7 N Z O m<J :D <o mwmp 1. 82, 9a<W Z< p< Frz m p �QO pzw 7W2W Ooz r W a Z�• a W op, WWOa J< Z m W <s Z O�Z <r�o <OF '0 ZLi mod �}OZ 9<m <o�"opvN pw ypj y"Qi ga ��uu �<Qu� �coicpi �aoma �Uw< COmm�' O O N O acO om om n No. L� fV tVN.=NNN�fV fy.- z mnNn��Nnama m o2 aio mNmN"adn�n p ON! Ky J I K + 14 li li li 14 li li li ti li li O 3 = nmNnmN*mm < Q M7 mNwoNNwNn_W m mONmnz aale le a' << �■i �c aui�e viiri< � i.: UNN 7 O O Z 5vp <ain�ci R 7 1- mNoionNo,o au�m o aid VNoom oNo w a� mmNNm�O mNm O � 3 73 7 77 X XX �hnnnnnnnng � �� < w rc r a v�mmn '%�nnnna < r W< �w O<VI z Z W < W V QO N m M N< I<- Z O iIIN� Cl 0<3 S K F V < < U 3= 31 2 WWW W W W I I I m COmm�' O O N O acO om om n No. L� fV tVN.=NNN�fV fy.- z mnNn��Nnama m o2 aio mNmN"adn�n p ON! Ky J I K + 14 li li li 14 li li li ti li li O 3 = nmNnmN*mm < Q M7 mNwoNNwNn_W m mONmnz aale le a' << �■i �c aui�e viiri< � i.: UNN 7 O O Z 5vp <ain�ci R 7 1- mNoionNo,o au�m o aid VNoom oNo w a� mmNNm�O mNm O � 3 73 7 77 X XX �hnnnnnnnng � �� OOI-OI-LZLOCZOZ 2139WnN 103r021d (3 61 d0 S 133HS I 31VOS 310N Stl � cwtm C! I3snHayssvn "mamew, 33M M)1DNnvv Zi, .a'n �lrorrdOM&M 30LL .9NISR! a "�� " �°'�" ''� �°"� "' tNn-w�v/m /�It o�tw tquon�v wlrrcwao mr a N00/HMl OWl OW 18diJ 9002 'C kmvn8a3! 'NNO \ \ 'NMO 'S30 �tl0 f HOJ 033MYd3Hd 5113snHOVSS V W 'l3A0n1NVN �kVM S1100S (INV 0`d08 0300na 1`d ONISnOH 03SOd0dd X103 lN3WdOl3A30 MIS Z N` Id NOISIAiaenS 3AIIINl33a l - "19 '^'A SLANIANNVn ntN • ■771n NnY7 - nOln9n - nnnnnt �1�11Q►��l�ll�l�l►� AN��jIrl� f1� 1�L 11��LL 11 1111 s 'ddtl NOI1dlMOS30 NOISV38 'ON 3Lva 1 W 6 �_ UUUU UU OD rlom�o a O UZzPz z1nW1ri o m-W j0L m <OQ = O O N J Q Qd s 2O NQS w �pj H p •-O 1� ^ f.N W WW W W m Oz<m< G<E3<a W O Yw r JOZ fa. i K tsj w U w O m mIQ- Ocl <W U -a w-,2 w. wigz <o1n oo < mW a OwN<O Njcwi-"z rao o n �Z� m ^3m < g m> a z< <0 z a.=r� azo v_I m < wo>* ~O �a QI o< x mf- m z U V O W U Nw~ w< \ \ erN �M Nsa joN9 joF,M umy Kw<m G] N U U m U 0 f� no M Foo 0 �6 z a w ' N a m m>7�2 <wpU Zoj;a m< �w <<jEm 1nm�� * � y�. 3 0 -J' r <1U22 'f� O •' a'OWO N = O < Zi OmKn f O3 Sd W iE a O 3 O 000 a O R-332.00' aa�s N*c<i a�'1wn coFU<W . W d WZF3 V J < F' N R K IU/1 K a W oja I WJ W 0 1-wzs wo 10-nv rooz< �zz 10 vt r z<o U w.0 OU `'!j. U O w Q O a o 10/1 zi - a Q O 1- O O oz- :<H OOg9l ad :<oza Oooz •o¢< d "A a ROADWAY 11WwwIN.11� 'I myzy�1Ko nMm 71N/1 Na =K<wZw Im->UO pa K< nU ywjW J 0 m z _d60 sownuw< N mya1W� Z U W _ < 3 v 'r i diidP Q > o ? 3/N 11vIrMJV 'r Vg21VR o N O Z 'woo 08f -L9 A r Hd3Sd• J w m ih d/N w o _ nmom N331HLVN a a o 08f -L9 /D w 3.li,ZZ 9CN 0lNM03 _w z o 2Q� 00 d l8ti LIv.9 �UNm 2 W IJ SLI19 AL•L9 ^ °rte\ y " _apppp: L-72.31' R-292.00' .-7.10 3'09.9GtfN L L•2a.2r _ 29.39' j— 4.84 MD c — 14.00' F ol�n�Idd II o • n � 1 � �� M,Cf,Bf.Bt L L�� L�24.7P NO -15291— 7'E X12 ZZ'0 Np W = NI 50.79' N3SI5'28'E^� `�, 1 oo �►. f►9C 3,f►8Y9£! 3.94 N �I rzaa I g I M.C£,ZG9CS 2lvIn0V 31a0rwn AN HYMOV Mvorwri 991-L9 3/N 9 168 • 1 ir- * 1W "aa'! ZVIO 'd HL3NN3N 3/N 991-L9 o h �d• a v N �r < V j W l\ \ \ 0N3W � L) l \ r ss 3boV 110WW00 �3 1 W 6 �_ UUUU UU OD rlom�o a O UZzPz 2W J Q Qd s 2O NQS w <rz p<O WW W W m Oz<m< G<E3<a W O Yw r JOZ mUY F<mQO <W U -a w-,2 w. wigz <o1n oo < mW a OwN<O Njcwi-"z rao o Ove pzp OWY U v_I m < wo>* ~O �a QI o< x mf- Vj NK7Z WOmpz \ \ erN �M Nsa joN9 joF,M umy Kw<m _ m>7�2 <wpU Zoj;a m< �w <<jEm 1nm�� * � �� L-82.22' R-332.00' aa�s N*c<i a�'1wn coFU<W M.99�9CLfS �w o� 1-wzs wo 10-nv rooz< �zz 10 vt r z<o 341.34 o :foo oz- :<H OOg9l ad :<oza Oooz •o¢< d "A a ROADWAY " L-72.31' R-292.00' .-7.10 3'09.9GtfN L L•2a.2r _ 29.39' j— 4.84 MD c — 14.00' F ol�n�Idd II o • n � 1 � �� M,Cf,Bf.Bt L L�� L�24.7P NO -15291— 7'E X12 ZZ'0 Np W = NI 50.79' N3SI5'28'E^� `�, 1 oo �►. f►9C 3,f►8Y9£! 3.94 N �I rzaa I g I M.C£,ZG9CS 2lvIn0V 31a0rwn AN HYMOV Mvorwri 991-L9 3/N 9 168 • 1 ir- * 1W "aa'! ZVIO 'd HL3NN3N 3/N 991-L9 �aaammmmmo NNNN NNM a 4 VI < V j W w N UO O F Z 1n o OO�Nn NNN L) l 1.51 JO=?n <Qz00 18mmNn 1 W 6 �_ UUUU UU QJ� rlom�o a O UZzPz a. 2W J Q Qd s 2O NQS w <rz p<O WW W W m Oz<m< G<E3<a W O Yw r JOZ mUY F<mQO <W U -a w-,2 w. wigz <o1n oo < mW a OwN<O Njcwi-"z rao o Ove pzp OWY U v_I m < wo>* ~O W U3m . QI o< x mf- Vj NK7Z WOmpz OOOW�< J�Ki ymy11 �yy!{11 I�roi3 VI mmN �aaammmmmo NNNN NNM ,w 0=mz Wm w UY Nm00 << OO�Nn NNN O_ O U o I U r ammmmao wa NNNNNNn W W W W W W W K VO««Q« <<QO UUUU UU �< noamo�ooNoon ao m mnNN omcl!,q noon no a4mInmNVl�nm � NN[VNN NNN�NfVN NN Z a < nmm Nmn0lmaONO m L) �W 1 0 aemmmmcl aNm v OJ mmnlc�in mm NN01mn0 tl 10 p - J a. 3 <W 414141.. 14144. 1411 14 V.44V. mIN V1 VI fA V)VI VI41 VI VlfA VI VI � �V <mmmmmi�nN �I�m1�YY < < mmmMml�mNm mOmnm W� amvl---nv-=navmm n: z . �.d vi viri vi lem`/nlo vi vi .e � <4 U m� CIO 50O nav10N IniVO INION J Wry C Ci Wino mm O 10 NN W 100 I NNN 1060 9 RO 5� X XX Nn immNtmVNNfmtl NhaQ � :3 aP ,w 0=mz Wm zo >' <W 0 ow = 0 F o < O mAZ K 23< <<QO m �< N�Z a m0f a. am�a ion IU.+ma w <rz p<O 2�mK ,zwL OO< J« OW=� JOZ J = ovW� Jy0y2 wow, <0 Nz muo <OF oomo- zf-p8d mOU O^O =J 5M m<N <WK QYy1OQd m<W joN9 joF,M umy Kw<m m>7�2 <wpU Zoj;a m< �w <<jEm 1nm�� mow Zoo m mr- zcoi<r$ <wowo�.1 v_IoaZ Nm aa�s N*c<i a�'1wn coFU<W voiw.137 �w o� 1-wzs wo 10-nv rooz< �zz wozo r z<o :< o :foo oz- :<H o00 .OU ad :<oza Oooz •o¢< 61 40 9 _ 1 001-Ol-LZIO£ZOZ 2W A Id I 03LON SV 31VOS cWtto S113SnHOVSSYMI MOREM -'1MtLL.S NQLC)Nniv ti£ O71 iN3MId0i3 Lm 3aIL JNISIM HERE 9ooz '£ k8vn8e3-q YG 3L.va and a3avd3ad S-L13snHO`dSSVVi '13ADniN`dN ,kVM S110OS (INV UVON 03oonN ld ONi nOH 03SOdONd 803 1N3Wd013A30 311S 2 NVId NOISIAi(ie 1S 3AWNIACI �� I .ON Siva K � x O NUZZO woo O N O O O n w W < 7 m O <N m Z p n O ON <xJ W F O O W O w o o m m w .! W o W m K W J N U O Jm2QJ a FUNUW a Zo Z <a z pJ N Z 0 O 2 W� W J O O 7 O 11.^.11 w Q O d (U/1 •LJ• U p1 0m p N V=1<OU= w Fr m m O W am "ii y2� K 0 , V Ow g no H>On O WO a p V 1 hU �0�< :. ■ 1Pm000 < W O}<% U'u$ m Ucz fnzw12-W- p m 2 p} Jm O 2 FFq� D W o mea 0 Z 00O6p< JJ�C: i �i�1 OW H Z g 3 '2 A •F�Ji Li' aa}n < n Z R m O W m O d <o C a i O O � pm�na oao nV3N0P1 N331HLVN gW°�Z<w V aaVMa3 ( � VN l61• -p -L9 Id I 03LON SV 31VOS cWtto S113SnHOVSSYMI MOREM -'1MtLL.S NQLC)Nniv ti£ O71 iN3MId0i3 Lm 3aIL JNISIM O LL 9ooz '£ k8vn8e3-q YG 3L.va and a3avd3ad S-L13snHO`dSSVVi '13ADniN`dN ,kVM S110OS (INV UVON 03oonN ld ONi nOH 03SOdONd 803 1N3Wd013A30 311S 2 NVId NOISIAi(ie 1S 3AWNIACI �� I .ON Siva I O NUZZO woo O N O O O n w W < 7 m O <N m Z p n O ON <xJ W F O O W O w o o m m w .! W o W m K W J N U O Jm2QJ a FUNUW a Zo Z <a z pJ N Z 0 O 2 W� W J O O 7 O 11.^.11 w Q O d (U/1 •LJ• U p1 0m p N V=1<OU= w Fr m m O W am "ii y2� K 0 , V Ow g no H>On p 1 hU �0�< :. ■ SLa380H 83HdOIS01HO V VONn o/o 011 NV2103803 V NINONO •SNMOO AIN Z81• -L9 M-li,ZZ.9fS 60'Lll 1 3rf�£�N Jp \ I -7 O Sot yW171SSN zdLD l l cia r s� w o�/ ste fe•Z 0 I.1 7 00'0 h N M h a / /,7 M / 9 \ M 4d /J .OIOtL. AYMavoa 292.00' 3,89.9—LyN ,T\ L�25.21 z�,,... ,1B•OL ,or•Lzl gain _=►mil iiN Id Z9 80'6fL9 3.9*'tiL1f I � O LL I YG I I I I I 9 Ago ITr �� I / / I O NUZZO woo O N O O O n w W < 7 e�+r, 4`�I,., R ZO rc <xJ < 0 L-77.50' R-205.00' lz� A. N ,t N55 Iri M.fY.6iare a61 �. I��_l 1.1 I aaa� N •eel — --.__ �,� _ .00,or�7 oF.e 3.9Q1 •v, AVMaVotj � ao• L.l4.mm- 240P' r6 ode 5.jp:2.03r""� 54.1 '�3o.59T N24 31 1576 I � .16.4 I 1.95 I I I I I I 9 Ago ITr �� I ZVIa '3 HL3NN3N d/N 991-L9 M.M .Zi•19Z �nmmmmmaNNtn`!nJ ae. <U 'MY a .WC�v. lotto. rw•�Irrnwm m� s _ Ira w -m/ ww �w wrn u wrm me o a�anameno.■ • n""a", • maamao -.molar o vxmfI� a r N Z x < U J N Y2 U _O O_ Op-\41�K WKW a: O SWZ2W yP }? O NUZZO woo O N O O O n w W < �Qm W/ QV 2 ZOI%IQ WO -Q2 dNN�� Fla O < azo 1Pm000 < W O}<% U'u$ m Ucz fnzw12-W- p m 2 p} Jm W U W D W o mea 0 WRZ 00O6p< JJ�C: i �i�1 OW H wo �V171'N O 0 2 aa}n < n Z R m O W m O d <o pm�na oao o�w gW°�Z<w =00 W O O <�i1o<vai m'<w UJ O� 00< mFH OpN� mF<O �O?K OV Na a!w< F' 2 m»aW,Z *gwww OU<=o <wpU 1-�a< OOaz K6 <aj oo <a�m 'a «ao w z m Nat{lJ^ No zmm U O ym.aQ�� .0 >,z 5z a W OJ < OJ �F- OJ � U OU a?pZ Z 2 Q s OJ w< OJ < O o 02 N < a U O < 'woo �Wmin iyt� WWZ J Y W J i La.z 2 i p� �nmmmmmaNNtn`!nJ � a r N Z x < �Qm W/ QV 2 ZOI%IQ WO -Q2 dNN�� Fla O < Nw` ,o 1Pm000 < W O}<% U'u$ m Ucz fnzw12-W- p m 2 p} Jm W U W WOm} 0 WRZ 00O6p< JJ�C: i �i�1 OW H wo �V171'N �nmmmmmaNNtn`!nJ Q 42m < Z� 9W a Z<; yP }? 02 T VQ0 I x�.011 >j Z Z m<KWo O ~F 02 Z �Vw1U O U U U U = WO UOZ QN m<J j�VliWV ~p<W p8FQ-pw. rn Zpw_ <1' N OQ ~Q �QO FW m� 2�• y O< 9Q< 7WxW 002 S J OW FWa WOm} m(,(<�z mi,mVl F= Z O O 0 2 < p F� < O F Z R m O W m O d <o o�w gW°�Z<w <�K <�i1o<vai m'<w UJ O� 00< mFH OpN� mF<O �O?K OV Na a!w< F' 2 m»aW,Z *gwww OU<=o <wpU 1-�a< OOaz K6 <aj oo <a�m 'a o zw-PL F ZOF-ID m Nat{lJ^ No � <ow nix ym.aQ�� .0 >,z 5z OJ < OJ �F- OJ � U OU OJ z OU OU OJ w< OJ < O o JO U < a U O < �nmmmmmaNNtn`!nJ Q < a aW} bmbl�aONNNO^N nmo��a'ola Z<; �Mn ^ ^ 02 o. to VQ0 I V m a x h mm O^Nn W W W W W W W a = V xU[<J02QQ � I W U U U U = �O�OI�pOp Caq cqn zcgcq N N^tV .=SIV fV 2 •. �<j a vmi �Mn mO�oOm " O� a s Q N m N p v n✓1 COn YMO N.-NJ�„j� W 1pp�1A 1 • 144. Y.1i 4.li li Q �_ VI Vl I/1IA VI I/1 V1 � vU O f�NODOmO < < nm^m,pN W maaa moa- I�eoiad�vi 0 <4 U NN 00 Z 5a OmOO,O'nbO xN 0007IN7 O W O C O n g 0 0 W a W N O N O O N w O go on 3 a3 6t AOL OOt-0 NOISLA38 S1N3908 83Hdo'sINHO v VONn vo 011 NVW3803 VN INONO 'SNMO3 Id 03ION SV 31VOS owo si 3snFovmvi Imawevivo '133HLS NMONnav Z£ 37n MM 0131M 3aLL JNISIN =o 000000000 000000000.- 9002 T k8vnma3A VmV11�o� 4�4 Va Nod mNVd3Hd S113snHDVSSVh '13>10n1NVN AVM S110OS 0NV 0VON 039onN 1V 9NISf10H 03SOdO8d 2104 1N3YVdO13A30 311S -k NV Id NOISIAi(ienS 3ALINl334 Z� -ON 31VO < aZ0 W1� F O L,,C �W �FE< < o m <z m o p<m n j z n d j, 6 0100/1�mO F O O ^ O Q: W O a O O O � Oji -0! 0 o m z < 00 d � U n W Z F O 9 Y fUfp-pSo m w w U w cuwi it d m000>- �UNm II < 0 U U o d^ W 2 H a <z0 z S1N3908 83Hdo'sINHO v VONn vo 011 NVW3803 VN INONO 'SNMO3 Id 03ION SV 31VOS owo si 3snFovmvi Imawevivo '133HLS NMONnav Z£ 37n MM 0131M 3aLL JNISIN O 000000000 000000000.- 9002 T k8vnma3A < Va Nod mNVd3Hd S113snHDVSSVh '13>10n1NVN AVM S110OS 0NV 0VON 039onN 1V 9NISf10H 03SOdO8d 2104 1N3YVdO13A30 311S -k NV Id NOISIAi(ienS 3ALINl334 Z� -ON 31VO < aZ0 W1� F O L,,C �W �FE< < o m <z m o p<m n j z n d a o 0100/1�mO F O O ^ O Q: W O a m W ' p 0 lJ -0! 0 o m z maa4 a0=z 1.mW� W m W N V m U n p v O a a w < o z < cuwi it d m000>- �UNm II < 0 U U o d^ W 2 H Z W O U U O W In* r Oln o 0 w O O Z K O W O Ow Om v}`p3W vw1 -�O Loa sm as o" Z y_h4f U OZwD m m myyZ��WO m C� m O W 0 W, 0. <3 � H>UO l o a K Q no a suww ■ ■ O F < O W rrMti1■Iq ]r1 1 l�A M'�� •Asp 1ra1�1■ K O� MOx tU TI1 YO�,� 1 t ylpp M tOIO r'MY W m� 3 _ -RVxOY W$VRr /00N M 1W WIr !r p� 9 W aaasasxovaarx • xiiuuri - **Laos - avassv o H N O O O 000000000 000000000.- <YJ < 4100-(9 0 Z� OrfW mmmh I]N10 < aZ0 W1� F O L,,C �W �FE< < amara a n Awa pi a o 0100/1�mO < O O U�- U 0 z O Q: W O a W K 12a ¢ ww< 0 o m z maa4 a0=z z o a m =Z<2 NiN Ov Z aW�' om < azw cuwi it d m000>- �UNm zz ai 1- Z W IV w rc NNI<aamrnnnnmmmammonam O O w 000000000 000000000.- <U N 00 �K 1�/1 O W W�: Z U NUZZO OrfW mmmh I]N10 Wm < W1� F O L,,C O O 2 V 3! zo tr wm W01�� 0 0 W W K O U�- U 0 z O OF Q <p F ::106 « V� Q K W WK I!i ZUN 02 <1m/JW O QOYU om < IW !IL < �w Z- f2affi z z�tCojCNl1 F2 000N0 m� a N�j� na 1<-ir000 <z Oln o m m z < O S m }<} <m }� U 9M M N arca mapz MP o OCIz r-moo<ox ooLL;;� � w =<w0 �Vi2N • n M • J<0 w rc NNI<aamrnnnnmmmammonam 000000000 000000000.- I,'1.. fwz< 00000 00000 �V �y U2< 2 M01anMn�.Oj *!IOjh^M0b•�NbU00iN X0'1 MlqN Nrj < W Ozr *i .- < Vf O^N i<m OJ Ut 0z I F � W Z� <U<O N OF Q M2 n U202ANT o� wcpi 9Nwo o�n W o< am R wm< Myra zp� N W� N •O Id I� al7 0i h ^ I!1 ^ 1�y�� < 4 N O m ~O ? m om U O< ? W 2 K D U H �0 mapz �bo-A1a��m0 IPF ww p � KOK} P- Hp 0 3 J<0 O F < O W < Wj 0< m< N <) N M. -0 X2 = O< 2 J O K < S W 0 2 0 W W < W <a;80 W zm <a� zW<m Zroo ocoiaao 0002 �9 GNU M�oW MO> mmOw mw tno>-Z ^m a�_^ 1a1��vo-i cw� ~�vwi a�c<i Qu ua HW O HW2 O 1-0 p2< pJZW04, 1...22 000 HWp20 2ww<W HZ<O pooz w rc NNI<aamrnnnnmmmammonam 000000000 000000000.- I,'1.. fwz< 00000 00000 �V �y U2< 2 M01anMn�.Oj *!IOjh^M0b•�NbU00iN X0'1 MlqN Nrj < W Ozr *i .- < Vf O^N i<m OJ Ut I F � U=3 WWNnvad.mm nn zmmmm''m N 0a1� W W W W W W W W W =o I I W W WWW WWW W< W W =ODUUUI=/I=NI=/f20SU ^W U202ANT N 0 000000000 000000000.- I,'1.. 00000 00000 �V �y uj Z V �MNN Q1a O OJ amN ♦m♦ N m m n m< M n N M om • ^W l4 li LL 4. li 1i 14441•: 03 3>>_ VI IN VI fA N VI VI 1/1 f/1 Vl N Y]YmNNmr]mn < U < *10N00N0�017a macre.-aammo W� m N •O Id I� al7 0i h ^ I!1 ^ 1�y�� < 4 o U 00 00 ONam00Nm000m WN H O NnnCOj��NN N•m(] mO � 13 0 3 00 33 NM<0mnm*10 < 6L 30 6 133H5 OOL/OL-LZLO£ZOZ 0310N SV (WIZO c„zcnHovmvvi �NSWO IMMS NMONnav a a38WnN 1O3f0ad 31VOS Z£ 7n 1N3MIddOl3A3Q 3011 tiNlSIa e000„w Mr N W00 0W1 19da Lada 9002 'SZ AatlnNVf 'NH0 'NM0 'S30 aLV0 HOA 033UVd3Md S113SnHO SS Y W '13X3nl NVN .AVM SHOOS ONV OV08 0399n8 lV 1N3WdO13A34 lVI1N3aIS38 a3SOd08d 311-408d (INV NVId AVMGVON vole vn wlrin •u Iran rot 191110 •aa��llxor��r� • s��ar� • �aa�e� - ��n�nr Ieuo11^�� 'ddV NOUdIaOS30 NOISIA38 'ON 3iva � a a N W N I— p? Z H < K _ X,< p 2 - Z�joo K W U W yy aCUU U IMA m_�Zo �UNm O� Z W 'd I 96'LZ 33A3 I � � \ v V O � ypt 96+4 :SOA3 o o 0 0 ........ m ui Z8'LZ WR M ` ` OOi O I (4HW0)08tz=1nO ANI ,ZL N o NI Zt N » z + uI Wag„'N ......... S6 VZ-NI ANI OL-Z - - I ZO'£4+41 I lL'LZ a > p a 0'Bl l V15 : II m II 9HW0 1 �N Y HW�> L9'LZ f 1 p-pp a 3 - L. �-dLNIWn 0-6 m'sz=lm no ANI .ot ' p-p os'LZ=WIa 2-� a/l,o•u •o'9z+b Vls N . ___.._ ..__ LL'LZ t �I() L t lyir iii IY C � I IU LL'LZ 30AS o JN v�N a 3 ; s9+£ sone p N o m ii �JI%II '1: 41 t N I L W m � I 3 m 96'LZ i l� NI U ry K aI K IJ I,AmoM�o =�Nm Li _ Oto w iia LS'lz- iWn5 o II II o 11 II I�° LS'SZ=1n0 ANI,OL m� o0'9Z=WIa NI-1,0'u '0•00+e vis OZ'8Z g �I GLOO Ibl O ECT I L£'SZ=1nO ANI .ZL L4'SZ=NI ANI 6£'OZ=l ANI „9 ' ,OL-Z OV9Z=WIa Zb 02= NI ,-Z ANI B 1,0' 0'S VIS HW z£-GL+Z VISa WIa a LHVISW o V 8Z + } c il” %1141 pZ O N m Na XM n �Itl ,y yd I. O a Ute- M y M J I OL'8Z NIT £9'oZ=ino ANI 9 -- (Z3d)09'az=lnoANI -Zl SL'9z=WI U 99'bZ=NI ANI ,ZL 9'68+L VIS 6HWS l9'9z=WIa • ,. ,0' '0-09+L tll OWN __..... ...............V _. ......... I .._..._.__.. I I P. 3 � N V Z __ 2D p MP S6 8Z O K x I--- mZ< a. WO + I Y O N m N >>�'. I I I 'NIW F NItl1NIVW ''fa3n03 M K Z'6 Z3 n313 Ind 3 � 59+0 V15 Id o `5 I SZ'L9+0 V15-'M'0'a 9'L9+d V1S OVOa l3nVaO d0 X003 j ............... ....... .............. 0 z'£s+o vis ; mez+ a 03 881 1 '{ k VC lir Ili 4 Iy rIy , � 0'6Z c 0 I 0 6'8 M N yqyq$ F� O 6L d0 OL 0 0L/OL-LZ"'Z02 0310N SV 133H5 839WnN IO3r08d W00 OV18d8 _ 18da 900z 'SZ kHvnNvr owo simnFaysswi '39alaeM 133a1S NO1JNnsv 7n INWOM&M 3M ONlSIN HOJ Q3MVd3ad S113snHOVSSVV4 '13>IOf11NVN ,kVM SHOOS ONb OVO8 039pm 1`d 1N3Wd013A30 IVIAKIS38 03SOdO8d 311302Jd dN`d NVId AVMGVON O N w &-.-Wm yv, i �lim pA a " � pro vam�r x 4 .p. L. MY ]YI •.. IIVi.,11 ,01 ].Y W,.iYM 0000 _ wne M1 twlrn u learn ae< 3 uannrovur■ � niiuuvi - rea.an - nen.nv N MENEM ��Izzn�cJ N I a aYJ a O U d U azoo Nwz Q 00�n c O a as < o I I :Moo 0 0 a -a o = A313 IAd x a z 5 Z, wza� v 0 13 U z ma4LL = .. w ate= Z o a =Z<Z x g z zwoo aWo� a W v 8 ado F' o Noo> U N o a m H z m Z W N 9 It 8 Y £S'ZZ+L tl1S V-AVMOV08 0010£ = A313 IAd = VIS [Ad 01,L a3AO3 'NIM '13-5 NIVINIVw ££'9L=In0 ANI „9 - 9f'gl=N1 ANI „9-Z lS'9l=NI A I „9-Z b9'6Z=Wl8 I Z6 6Z=Wla 8,L'9 0'59+9 VIS ZHWS 8,6'9 L'SL+L VIS tMris m vi J b. W3 eL,sz=lno ANI „£ ApL9'6Z d OZ'9L=N1 ANI ,9 N 06'62=W1a 80'9L 'S'£9+9 Vis NOI111 Vls Idfl 30VM3S Sb'Bt=1 n0 ANI „9 N 9b'9l=Nl ANI „9 N ff'6Z=W8 NIII > 0+VIHWS I _..._ ................_....... SZ 6Z ZO'Zz- rens I 3 20'9Z=1n0 ANI „0l N 0692=rMl "p o LiS£L 'ZZb+g VIS OLEO £r2z=dwns O be £L'SZ 1n0 ANI „OLIs w g69Z=W18 l 0'Ob+9 VIS 1190 No 1.0" Sg'Sz=Ino ANI „Zt m 06'SZ=NI ANI „OL -Z o 06'92 WI8 0 o ............ o a a ff'Sz=InO ANI „Zt h ; 9f'SZ=NI ANI „Zto. ...._....9b•'SZ-NI...ANt...�,Ot...._. w fO ij io uKi Z� 8Z OL.9z=WI8 = Nd I 'of I 1.011'f'bf+S Vis o H 11 o LHwO 1^ _...._CV61=1n0- ANI -„g 9L'6l=NI ANI „9 - TOE LZ'9Z=w18 0'SZ+S VIS LLHWS _............._96'LZ I 00'8Z 30A3.. Z.Of 96+b :SOA3 h o o v 6'6Z Nm (bHW0)09'bZ=InO ANI w o and �� i nN ,ZL 99'bZ=NI ANI „ZL = N++, gvoi96'bZ=NI .................... ........ ..__._.... ANI ,OL -Z II $ r n O II O§'LZs;VIIN'... 'O'£b+b •'^ 80'LL VIS 9HW0 o N zz �w—q 2 Q Y axons a 3 J I LO'IZ=dWnS L•8 LO'Sz=1n0 ANI „OL 09,LZ=WI8 a/1,0'Ll '0'9Z+b VIS V IL'LZ aK 0 00 M b =Nq V LL'LZ 30A9 o JI h vmN 01y a rnir �.n 9 It 8 Y 61 AO LL OOL/OL-LZLOfZOZ 83ewnN 1o3road0310N SV 31V05 OMEO sl I nHovssvw IHBVWO 1MUS NMONnvv ze P wOaNHO sw1 leda Leda sON'sz AavnNtlr OM 1bwdOl3A3U 3M IN , ''NMO 'S 0 rya NOd 032Vd3id mew...ern e1 weanas g NOISA3a ON tl0 J113JHOV' ellll�frl •NOLLdIaOS30 Iloaeee Ilre eer n AVM SHOOS dN`d OVOH 0300naXON 1V 1N3WdOl3A30 l`dI1N341S38 03SOd08d 311JONd GN`d NVId ,k`dMGVON �I�T�ATT��(n�1�� lel loll 1111VV � < a N N W N Oz O N H i < Qz 2p O 'z N FL FA o tz < V{ a w Wrc ' o iV in m a m w a M 0 oNJ v wWa K K N K K K o Awa I < < OI o ao o voi w wo n o�vm o o In o o d o m-wp w a < a� M n a I•'1 O saz wx< Y m v o ^ ma�0� W1 N>O� W < 2 m z 2 K 0m a m N M Y m zz<z 2600 Y N v z _ E� w Q U Q Q Q a�UU U VI V1320 ZU 3 2 p < 00 ONm z W IV 00 �',• _(01031NVW)OO'bZ=NL ARI „9.1.__., p 6'6Z y �1,9'll L'6L+4 Vis LLHWO o h 3 I I o 2 ^ J ...........(fHWO)fb'bZ.=1n0...ANL...Z1..� FZQ-6L�=�i�nO �( g�. 0p ' L ECT- OL'SZ=NI ANI OL -Z a. 6'6Z o y , �- OL'LZ=WIa '9'89+4 t f • a,l'4 tl15 SHWO „9 9 LB'LZ 30A3 1S W— -...-L1+10-SOA3 S8'LZ � Fs:g,cg;z=inO � I P I.. I .............. _.._....... ...................... £9'2=dWns ANI OL 99'LZ I o (00601S)ZZ'bZ=1nO ANI ,9in 1O ul 90'9Z=WIa S•6Z • uee (SHWO)6S'bZ=N1 ANI ,Z J m a,6'6L L'bL+4 Vis • • I •II y '^ ri NpNM (bHWO)LZ'bZ=NI ANI .Z (ZHwO)LS'bZ=NI ANI dddv� v _ g o :4 ' 980 _ O '.' ' +� ,Z (f80)09'bZ=N1 ANI ,0 wd n l o II II p8p; n > >IIa... W < n ® a 00'6Z=WI ..._....____......n.9•tz......b-40+t...vl_..... S JN bS'LZ N W N £HW S•6Z o zr NWo I 9 � 59 s 5 a Y I 69'OZ=dWnS 69'bZ=1nO ANI ,OL �o ZCLZ=WIa 'S•£0+b J 1n0 ANI ZL_ a 10'9 tl1S Y _(fHWO)994Z (IHWO)LL bZ=NI ANI 480 I f80 0S LZ p N < .ZL (480)SL'bZ=NI ANI 9'6Z '�' ,OL ££'LZ=wla 8,0'9 9'f6+f VIS 2HW0 9S'LZ I BS'LZ 30A8 9'6Z W I L9+f SOAB 1 (£HWO)6Z 4Z=1n0 ANI ZL (9HW0)4f bZ.=NL.,ANI zl 89•LZ N . S .. 6Z-wla '9'L6+£ ! 9'6Z +O 1,9'Lf tl1S bHW I r7 O ul W m N J 9i i£ 6Z W e £6'LZ o t �I o Z'6Z N II,� O r+ x Z 6Z I m 1 2 - W Ox.4�g' J o.... n O .................. ...Fooa. ........ ..A.z_.. W 892 Ln 3 9b'SZ=1n0 ANI ,Zl 0'6Z + f9'SZ=N1 ANI .OL -Z mo N ao•9z=wla < � 1,09 O'Sf+z tl1S LHNG M v� i 6'9Z WOL*LZ=dMlS I Ife 6? -..00SZ=1nO..AN1_31 -- 'O £b•8Z p fl'BZ=018 �I N L BZ + O'9Z+z Vis Z80 R LEO cV ......................... ... I} ............. 40'LZ 1nO ANII 9 9,9z C9BZ=1418 ' 0.09+L VIS 9HAS n......,., ._. ........... ........ .. ...._... 89'82 Ln r S 8Z + 83A00 'NI '13-9 NItl1Nl W b'8Z W i6'9Z oa L'8Z ± y ado oz< moo I' < ; 0'6Z LL'49+0 VIS -'M'0'8 19N I V/9+0 -vis OVOa 13Atla0 30 3003 .-. € --_.. _ 1 ............. ....,,,................... . ............. ..... o Ln < 9'8Z + OtlOa l3Atla0l d0 343 3 < O +25 Iit +n, �;I'I � ___... ......_......_ .._........._... 0:t 6Z ' SllO,,s i _........ ... _._...._ ............. _.__..._._ O 0M 0 l'6Z o+ 61 AO Zl OOL/OL-LZIOCZOZ 0310N SV 133H5 a39WnN 103f'Oad 31V3S NO s,1 nHovmvi �5 aivem MUS NM0NnW Tint I `� jN3 � �u ONISR! �u xv a fror •` "_'- xiriraaoa ew ; o W0O OWl lgda lgda 9002 'SZ AaVnNVf 'NHO 'NMO 'S30 �y0 ^Vd 032lVd3ad S-L13snHO SS Y W '13>ionl NVN AVM SHOOS ONd GV08 0300n21 ld 1N3Wd013A30 I`dI1N301S38 (13SOd08d 311JONd GNd N` Id AVMddON - cv arra aoe WA l laa vn MORA" •=.•00.0•.0•.' n�u ••v� - •eaee• • ••n•e• lel l�li l 111 l �1�L�1�11 1rI r1�C� a o N 'ddV NOIldlb0S30 NOISIA3a 'ON 31VO 69'9Z=1(10 ANI „Ol j,.._ ..._._._ __...... ._.._.. i 49'9Z=N1 ANI ,9 M N O m OUtJ,9' � 03SOdObd H � a < �•�£ FZ � QZO 49'0£=WIaIx m r- rc�z d6 T � o a,Z'L o a owmI a I a W XYO)Nul O O e w z z 0 0� ti maw o < z �} I<nhoz z z k m 3 =z<2 Y N v 2 s•Oi 09'LZ=NI ANI „£ i 'woo g=mx w '^ U 3 0 z 0 20 z �jF=-UONm e) 1 -Zap Z w IV `� 0 > a,6'£l 4Z'OL+6 VIS LHWS .; O Ln + rn o 0 O 0 + O _VW 69'9Z=1(10 ANI „Ol j,.._ ..._._._ __...... ._.._.. i 49'9Z=N1 ANI ,9 m 03SOdObd 99'9Z=N1 ANI ,9 �•�£ 49'0£=WIaIx m a,Z'L 66'Lb+6 VIS LHWS-X3 e ',. OW 9z ANI„9 N oo m s•Oi 09'LZ=NI ANI „£ i ZVO£=WIa K a,6'£l 4Z'OL+6 VIS LHWS .; l0'11+6 VIS-'M'O'a N.. L6.6Z 9C6Z - A313 [Ad 31 271.7r, _ 4'a'LZ=1nO ANI ,OL L9'6Z=WIa 1 L'6Z 06+9 = ViS IAd 8'6Z ............... M 90*0 a. et 9'6Z Qom O I i v w i f a of I oom = o L'6Z YI N O II II S£'0£ MA3 rn 01+9 IS3A3 j Zb'0C ''.. aw$m 9'6Z I O U V)W N N NN n �N h, j N d .... _..... __..... i....._. I I LS 0C o II ^+onn £6'9L=1nO ANI ,9 n o w v0S w I 4.6Z > > II n .n 96'g L=NI ANI„9-£ � Ili, ul 0'09+L VIS SLHWS o z2N wa Iwilm Y <_.. _._..._ aeras a Cl £'6Z _ z U m _ d J r w U £s'ZZ+L IVIS w j O oN 3 ...................N01133Sa31Nl............ m 98 i N 9i3Oi g-AVMOVOa n. g�z m o Z6Z £Z'O£ :33A8 x } 3 m N OL+L MAS ( 1 �3a <� > ZL'0£ M 3¢a n Z'6Z 94'91=1nO ANI „g a3Ao3 I l9'9L=Nl ANI ,9-Z W '1l-4 NIVINIVW Z6'6Z=Wl8 00 ' l 0' L+9 VIS blH Z,6Z 1,9'g L=inO ANI „9 N o '.. L9'BL=NI ANI .9 69'62=WIa vI Z9.6Z VIS £IHWS 6Z ':.......W3_9L'SZ=InO..ANI_. £ ........_ OZ'9L=Nl ANI „9 ' i•6Z 06'6Z=WIa l9'££ '£'94+g is 'O m - NOIIVIS 1311 30VM3S m J .. Z L'6Z OS'ZZ=dWns ti6Z OS'9Z=InO ANI „OL 66'9Z=WIa 8,0'9 0'00+9 Vis 993 - o 0 0 II 9.6Z ('NVW)49'£Z=1nO ANI ,QL ! (LLHWO)1,9'£Z=N1 ANI ,9l 9 L'6Z=WIa £'£6+61_VIS--_ ZlHWO __.i... L 9.9Z 8'6Z Ko a. K M (° N (ZLHWO)00'4Z=1nO ANI „9L I n m `(OiO31NVV000'bZ=R1 ANI 9l II Osez=Wla N 6'6Z ''.. 1,9'll ' L'6L+4 V1S LLHWO w CL o = . o of n I II O Ln + rn o 0 O 0 + O 61 d0 fl 133HS a38WnN 103r0ad OOL/OL—LZLO£ZOZ 0310N SY W00 'NHO I OWl 19da leda 'S30 900Z 'SZ AaYnNYr 'NMO NOLLdl83S30 NOISIAIM n om u3ndo-mm 3a11 ONISIa -- - aod a3avd3ad S-L13snHOVSSVV4 '13>ioniNVN ,IVM S110OS ONV OVON 030onN iV iN3WdOl3A3<J lVI1N301S38 MSOWO ld 311J08d dNd N` Id AVMGV08 m m is rK N ry2 F UrK U oN a IV m O a� Imo/ Bic OVr / 1 / a s -v" i r� V 8' tyC om u3ndo-mm 3a11 ONISIa -- - aod a3avd3ad S-L13snHOVSSVV4 '13>ioniNVN ,IVM S110OS ONV OVON 030onN iV iN3WdOl3A3<J lVI1N301S38 MSOWO ld 311J08d dNd N` Id AVMGV08 m m is N ry2 U oN a IV O / � U % E4' V 8' tyC 131BYJ i I I � == N m I i �3 avr ^� w "N E m . fi w 9- s$z rw ' 1 tvt �a \ I ^ \ U C G BUC 9x o BGr� �x 41 oa �.^ z B i rax .rix R 'J nba 3 • G. r�t �'a I CtZ S3iOYO ONItOi19y3QNf1 \ "• I 32P di1 \ 1VYJ(7 M rdin 'Bx .s�Bt N31YM s�ety * 5 tl313N / - '3373 G'BL N31YM OdOdl [g'92�UrroJAN1 Szz ar t nia SONno yoN/ y4 om u3ndo-mm 3a11 ONISIa -- - aod a3avd3ad S-L13snHOVSSVV4 '13>ioniNVN ,IVM S110OS ONV OVON 030onN iV iN3WdOl3A3<J lVI1N301S38 MSOWO ld 311J08d dNd N` Id AVMGV08 m m aw N ry2 U oN a IV O w—WW"orfww' 3111AINVI - •OAIO• - MY0l0• S LL MI N lwJ W N F <YJ Q OUaj � 2M <ZO ��Q aa » om¢n as o o I ar_ao x < aa? Z o a ZWOOwy d Woo U U "' tS_njZo a < F UNm W ai fl . S 8 6L 30 K OOL/OL-LZLO£ZOz 0310N SV 3105 133HS 83avinN 103r08d ��Za CI I7C(7)�v''v� lieiv�i L'�HLs• NO1DNnW M 3M 1N3MdOM&3a 3aLL ONISIa o, woa ovn leda Ieda 9ooz '9z xavnNVr 'AHO 'NMO 'S30 31y0 il0.i 43VilVd3tld 511351 IHOVSSY W '13>ioniNVN AVM SHOOS GNV OV08 a39968 1d 1N3V4d0l3A30 l`dI1N301S321 03S0d02id 3113ONd dN`d N` Id 3NIl ANn8i H3M3S --- eaaea�lxererrx xttleerrt • xearee - xeeeer �I�T�]�TTrT�r1�1C� lel v loll 1 11 11VV a 'ddV NOILdl83S30 NOISIA38 'ON 31V0 � 6La N ILII I� jVlS2H �'a t Yl {S'yr�i9 I I oZ� o t'BZ 2 wWZ<nW 22 XWyi I A �j�� Nw KF, - Z J -m" m o L 9Z a r <�wm m 1 11 `. no �v) •JaIff l� O O 5 «aww<0 Y 6 Z> o. 421J1 ma0� V o < ___.__......_..._ a U a-< 2 Z < g < =NQ2 OFx w QMog m V1 H z wY � 1.Z1 J w J 9Z 0 _N�20 2 p a �u- R Z W IV N n IL m 7r N iI £6'9L=1f10 ANI ,8 9A'G L=NI ANI d -C .. N 0 n 0 g g O 0 N O 0 0 + O h + Vat9CL'9Z jVlS2H t'BZ 2 wWZ<nW V U L 9Z ___.__......_..._ a U 9Z 0 N n IL m 3 o Ve m <n 0,OL+O VIS L311f19 ........ ......6£'OZ=InG ANI ,g...._... ...._.._ oo Zb'OZ-NI ANI ,9-Z z£'9z=wla 0'00+0 VIS OLHwS ti O N iI £6'9L=1f10 ANI ,8 9A'G L=NI ANI d -C .. N 0 n 0 g g O 0 N O 0 0 + O h + Bl !O SL Ool/ol—almoz ,04 = .1 Ohlzo s mnHows w H8M 133US No19Nnw z£ 133H5 a30WnN 1O3f0ad 3lVOS Tn '1N3MOMK3a 30LL oNISIM VIOO OKI 10da l0da 9002 'SZ AaVnNtlf •°••"•'•�•0° X"a � a+r+• �*'� fin■ mow ■l w r a . v■ w r i■ 'NHO 'NMO 'S30 31V0 NOd U3MVd3tld no,�-nraho, ara uw�°w w■ ,w n■rr L wr me Noudiaos30 N0151A3a 'ON 31VO S113SnHOVSS` V4 '13>10niNVN ■il■■■NO■■■111 • ■711■■■■, • IIO1■O■ • ..e■e■ 8 AVM SHOOS GNV OV08 030on2i lt1 1N3WdOl3A3a lb'I1N341S38 a3SOdO21d NVId 30VNIVNG (INV ONIOV80 lel •loll 111V � 11=1111 � �■� a a . . r'3P Cal J `�- U - 11^1111 - � ■ )/ f Z = N EF � -•.� d K � i W Ab �� t wsa m ��f maaW 2 2 .w.i■ ILl 3 Y 2 O s�� ny. 2Z N« 0 z Q m 0 = Z 11=1111 � �■� a a . . r'3P Cal J `�- oe�oaoo - 11^1111 - � ■ ©'II+.1111 � - • EF Ab �� a .w.i■ ILl 1 i■ • �� •� (1111:11' ` � � 11=1111 � �■� r'3P Cal Elm `�- oe�oaoo - 11^1111 - � ■ ©'II+.1111 � - • EF 11=1111 � �■� r'3P Cal EF Ab 1 � �■� r'3P Cal EF el eo sl ooVoL-cztrzoz - (331oN sv C*M SIMf1FK)MVMI ' MVO 133= NQ1flNlM M o 133HS N38WlIN l03POild �y� rtWw„ w� 'ire wer a fll1 '1N3Md0'OA30 3011 flNSR! a' WOO 18d WOO 18d WOO 9001 'f AtlYfltl83d _ w av e„ trio lm,:: w HOA 03JYd3ad �Iv� wa yr wmn L writs w ddtl ONOLLdIMOS30 S30 NO ISIA3a 'ON 31Y00 s113snHOVSSVYV '13)13n1NVN raarrrrrare■ . Ramsey ti AvM slloos aNv avow a3oona JIIII2I��I�IIJ111� 1V 1N3YVdoMAM IVLLN3aIS3a a3Sodoad r1�� S1Ib13a Wiio ISN00 44558--1. J �12 IB4 a7� o b b b o b R zr 01 gn�_ ZO _ A 3B 7g5 b �aHH ' =am� N �d41 01 BB 6tt a �Q� L ; .max yHy 4y1 iV O f 1e n N H N ammo l¢ w3m .e MR 12 <� N . 5 V P� Q7. G5Q y ss �y �y y� 12 N-14 A -R 12 6� • .Mro.tl 6 ee �R �� •lenv 3< y� 3003 im" 3<z � �e � b it xmpee N A -R I� 12 �I b �b OZ .o -.a 12I I v I 3WI 'MW& d0 3M R it 44 L 1 � ''12 � 94! i � Il■ �T b• B/ d0 Ll 133115 I 001/01-LZITZOZ MG.. MrOad I 11N SV 31r3s Of'ZO SLL35(1� .�moi.VMyi 'QliEWO '133mNueNnw at ma lea NOa lea raa soon v kmvnma3A OM %N3V4dO'W(I ML ONIS'It! 'NNO •NM0 3O I 31VO BOA O3VVd3ad NOILdINOS 0 NOISN3a •oN 31ra S113snH3VSSVYV '13>13fLLNVN AVM SHOOS CNV avoN a39968 1V 1N3Y4dO13A3a 1VLLN3aIS38 a3SOdONd SlIV130 NOLLon iSNOO R i 1 Id I r Yf!-Cf/p 'Arlin -O/d WW Y117mr11� •L IYrN mi 'F I loll t ..... �or��rw ■771��7t7-■01 0■ ■��tll• N �T�ivI2�iT�KI�nK^� � °e� V loll 1V�� W �_f? Rina < ~ Z �Woz pzy; Mcim13 aaa =o I x9Am A I IL_ JL Y I 5RE 61 !0 91 la ll I:ILfl �N L-LZLOMOZ d qpq�� G�w 03LON SV mmo Su nHOYMM '3:i01L9M elMUM P101.9NrW M n��Rvla HT1 '1MMO L9AN 3W IN ISR! aoA aaai/d3ad sins 1HOVSSVYV '13)13niNVN AVM sums aNV aVoa a39068 1V 1NMdOMA30 IVUNWIS3M a3SOdOHd SWAG NOLLonUSN00 Ili 1999; 0 0 0 0 0 i 0-+ 0 -B 0 0 0 00 aoooo e e e e e �k W N %sL r Il L J ee +. y pp>� ie��l g 1 8 •� N N rh �f Y ��m � i .Y am•7 �k R s3 .r.a Ili 1999; 0 0 0 0 0 i 0-+ 0 -B 0 0 0 00 aoooo e e e e e ci �°- wae •ea wrw u were ear � NAA see eererr■ • ■rll��er7 ■O1rU - ■serer N �KI2I��KI�K� W N P V trb ` �J c ee pp>� ie��l g 1 8 x0ii N c Y ��m � i �� am•7 �k ci W N P V ee a a d GL d0 at OOt/OL_LZtO£ZOZ 031ON SV 133HS Lt3BWnN 1031'ONd 31VOS fttZO su3sn�iVssvw3J 'GIa91'1V3 '1332LLS NQ1:►NI'1?JV tri vaa led LrOa led tau Booz •r kmvnie3 OM `LMMOUAOM aft SWIM 'ANO i 'mma I 31Va HOd a3NVd31d 'ddV NOLLdWS30 NOISIA3a 'ON 3LVa S113SnH3VSSVr4 '13HOnLNVN AVM SJ1005 aNV avoH a36668 1V 1NMdOMAW lVLLN3aIS3u a3SOd0Nd SWAG NOLLon iSNOO asra .0 9 N L l" a n� b x xxig 15j4 �R 12 gig s i IN R i31° 1-W1 N yjj3� I P F< < 3 its' la x NJ ^ N .4 d d ri d ..y W.. a.. nae.. ;;.L=. w a as av rr� `r.-ae1r�C.""iae�'y"�.'w".N� F NIN ON Or00ri • ■7111100r7 - ■01000 - ■e001r N N �b < J �=1 �o 00rc 98'0. Y)n i Sz MgL6m i9oz zbo6 CL a iE�Nm�=o MOM �I L aewAiO oil All Nv i vil. 6 ` s 3 JIM novo .3NAN eoon Yddd �iI G � a enoe NAd. eeoo dd.� t ■ b IJ� $ � n000 yy�Jdig F neon b.4 UN iG bibs <` N d i d d N i x ti z� g 0 p anon eeno �� i sad a as si li �I onno oono b We 11 R 1 YYid aYad RR e3 �! P�� ooeo Nnoeo xa @@��t�y� � ■��00d� odddd nNrwd � $ � Si 777 � � �tir�tljbtljtljstlj � �� ta.3'X a"�39 44 d sdd Kdd SECTION 7 SUBSIDIZED HOUSING INVENTORY SECTION 7 SUBSIDIZED HOUSING INVENTORY According to figures compiled by the Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD), on October 1, 2001, as updated April 24, 2003, Nantucket's subsidized housing inventory consisted of 100 units, representing 2.48% of its total 2000 housing stock of 4040. This is below the 10% threshold requirements established in 1969 under Chapter 774 of the Acts of 1969. An additional 310 subsidized housing units are required to meet the 10% threshold. SECTION 8 LIST OF EXCEPTIONS TO THE ZONING ORDINANCES AND OTHER LOCAL LAND USE REQUIREMENTS Please see attached memorandum from Arthur I. Reade, Jr. concerning exceptions to local by-laws and regulations. READE, GULLICKSEN, HANLEY & GIFFORD, LLP SIX YOUNG'S WAY NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554 ARTHUR I. READE, JR., P.C. KENNETH A. GULLICKSEN (508) 228-3128 MAILING ADDRESS MARIANNE HANLEY FAX: (508) 228-5630 POST OFFICE BOX 2669 WHITNEY A. GIFFORD NANTUCKET, MASS. 02584 May 28, 2003 Nantucket Board of Appeals 1 East Chestnut Street Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Re: Rugged Scott, LLC Comprehensive Permit Application Dear Board Members: This letter will serve as a memorandum as to the provisions of the Nantucket Code and other local regulations as to which exceptions are requested in connection with the above application. This memorandum is subject to augmentation in the event that further exceptions are determined to be necessary during the hearing process before the Board of Appeals ("ZBA"). The exceptions requested, and in certain instances an explanation of the reason for exceptions, are as follows: NANTUCKET CODE Chapter 127, Streets and Sidewalks § 127-1. Exception from the requirement for a permit for excavation or alteration of -a public way, sidewalk or bicycle path from the Nantucket Department of Public Works and the Board of Selectmen. The requirement to apply for additional permits from other Town agencies and officials would create an unnecessary duplication of work by the applicant, contrary to the purpose of the Comprehensive Permit process. The Department of Public Works will have the opportunity to review the project and submit comments to the ZEA for review during the hearing process. Chapter 139. Zonin § 139-7.A. Exception to permit a clubhouse/community building, which may also contain a retail shop, within a Limited Use General -2 ("LUG -211) zoning district. A clubhouse/community building for use by the residents of the proposed development and their invitees is READE, GULLICKSEN, HANLEY & GIFFORD, LLP Nantucket Board of Appeals May 28, 2003 Page 2 proposed. The clubhouse is expected to include a swimming pool. A small shop selling sundries such as coffee, newspapers, basic grocery items, ice cream and other similar items marketed primarily to the residents of the development may be included in the clubhouse building. These do not constitute permitted uses within the LUG -2 zoning district in which the site is located. § 139-12.B(3)(a). Exception from the requirement that the application be referred to the Nantucket Water Commission. The recommendations of the Wannacomet Water Company should be made through the Comprehensive Permit process before the ZBA. § 139-16.A. Exception from the intensity regulations as to lot area, frontage, setbacks and ground cover ratio. In the LUG -2 zoning district, minimum lot area is 80,000 square feet; minimum frontage is 150 feet; minimum front yard setback is 35 feet; minimum side and rear yard setback is 15 feet; and maximum ground cover ratio is 40. The proposed project will have lots ranging from about 2,112 square feet to about 11,353 square feet with the average lot area being about 4,898 square feet. The exception from setback requirements is necessary to allow flexibility in siting of the proposed buildings and to allow the use of attached fee simple town house dwellings with zero side yard setbacks. The ground cover ratio is planned to average about 24-., with some lots having a ratio as high as 450. This is necessary because of the smaller lot sizes. § 139-16.D. Exception from the regularity formula. This is necessary to allow for flexibility in designing lot shapes. § 139-18. Exception from on-site parking requirements for the lot which will contain the proposed clubhouse. Use of the clubhouse will be primarily by the residents of the development and their invitees, all of whom will be within easy walking distance. A limited number of READE, GULLICKSEN, HANLEY & GIFFORD, LLP Nantucket Board of Appeals May 28, 2003 Page 3 on-site parking spaces and several on -street parking spaces will be provided near this facility. § 139-20. Exception from the provision of off-street loading facilities for the lot which will contain the proposed clubhouse. There will,be adequate on -street areas which can provide for loading. § 139-20.1. Exception from the regulations as to driveway access. The Nantucket Department of Public Works can review and comment upon driveway access, and make recommendations to the ZBA as part of the Comprehensive Permit process. The requirement to apply for additional permits would create an unnecessary duplication of work on behalf of the applicant. § 139-23. Exception from the Site Plan Review provisions for the proposed clubhouse. The ZBA will be reviewing the entire project and separate site plan review for the clubhouse building in not necessary. § 139-24.A. Exception from the Phased Development provisions. Limiting the rate at which the project could be developed would place an undue hardship upon the applicant and thus increase the costs and impair the feasibility of an affordable housing project. § 139.26.C. Exception from the requirements under clause (1) for submission of a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Historic District Commission and under clause (2)(b) for submission of a sewer connection permit from the Department of Public Works in connection with a building permit application. § 139-28.A(3) and B(2). Exception from the requirement for certifications from the Historic District Commission before obtaining an occupancy permit. RULES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE SUBDIVISION OF LAND ISSUED BY THE NANTUCKET PLANNING BOARD § 2.06b(18). Exception to the required on-site disposal area. The size of the proposed project and READE, GULLICKSEN, HANLEY & GIFFORD, LLP Nantucket Board of Appeals May 28, 2003 Page 4 the property does not provide enough area for any on- site disposal. § 4.03a(1). Exception from the street width standards to allow pavement widths for the various proposed subdivision roadways of 16 feet (one-way road with no on street parking), 20 -feet (one-way road with on street parking limited to one side), 20 -feet (two-way road with no on street parking), and 24 -feet (two-way road with on street parking limited to one side). The use of differing pavement widths will allow greater flexibility in the project layout as well as creating greater control of on-site traffic flow. § 4.03e. Exception from the minimum design standards for streets to allow the use of'a 30 -foot right-of-way ("R.O.W.") in place of the required 40 -foot right-of- way. A 30 -foot R.O.W. would be utilized in only one location for the construction of a one way road. A 40 - foot R.O.W. is not needed due to the smaller pavement width for a one way road. § 4.03e. Exception from the minimum design standards for streets to allow pavement widths of 16 -feet (one- way road with no on street parking), 20 -feet (one-way road with on street parking limited to one side), 20 - feet (two-way road with no on street parking), and 24 - feet (two-way road with on street parking limited to one side). The use of differing pavement widths will allow greater flexibility in the project layout as well as creating greater control of on-site traffic patterns. § 4.04b. Exception to allow the use of a Turning "T" layout similar to that shown within Plate No. 4. The proposed "T" layout may exceed the 52 -foot maximum R.O.W. width at the end of the "T" layout in order to provide better access to lots. § 4.06b(3). Exception to allow the use of underground stormwater leaching/infiltration systems in place of the required leaching basins. Use of this type of system will reduce the amount of disturbance to the site during construction and will reduce the amount of required infrastructure. READE, GULLICKSEN, HANLEY & GIFFORD, LLP Nantucket Board of Appeals May 28, 2003 Page 5 § 4.06b(5). Exception to allow the use of gas and oil separators designed in compliance with section 4.06b(6) and the Department of Environmental Protections Stormwater Management Policy in place of the gas and oil separator specified by Appendix A, Plate 13. Designing the gas and oil separators in compliance with these more recent policies will provide a higher level of treatment and protection of groundwater resources. § 4.19. Exception to the requirement for a bicycle path within the boundaries of the project. The project proponent is proposing to construct an 8 -foot bicycle path parallel to Scott's Way that would begin at the proposed Fairgrounds Road bicycle path and extend to the project site. The proponent will also be constructing 4 -foot sidewalks within the project that will connect to the proposed Scott's Way bicycle path and provide access to the Rugged Road bicycle path. Therefore, the project will have access to the proposed bicycle path along Scott's Way and the existing bicycle path on Rugged Road. HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION The applicant requests an exception from all requirements for the submission of plans and materials to the Nantucket Historic District Commission ("HDC"). The HDC will be able to comment and make recommendations in connection with the Comprehensive Permit process before the ZPA. The submission of plans to the HDC and obtaining of approvals for all structures would be unduly burdensome to the applicant. FEES AND SECURITY; GENERAL The applicant requests an exception from the requirements for all local fees relating to the affordable housing units in this project, including but not limited to fees for building permits, sewer connection permits, and. water connection permits. The applicant further requests an exception from any requirement to post a bond, cash, covenant or other READE, GULLICKSEN, HANLEY & GIFFORD, LLP Nantucket Board of Appeals May 28, 2003 Page 6 security in connection with the construction of the proposed infrastructure improvements. The applicant further requests exceptions from the applicability of such other provisions of local by-laws and regulations as would otherwise be applicable to the project. ******************** Please advise this office if any further materials regarding the subject of this letter are required. Very truly yours, READE, GULLICKSEN, HANL Y & GIFFORD, LLP By. Al thur I. Reade, Jr., P.C. air@readelaw.com AIR/iry F:\WpOPQ\Posner\ZBA Exceptions LTR.doc SECTION 9 SITE ENGINEERING NARRATIVE A narrative summary prepared by Cullinan Engineering of the existing conditions and proposed development is attached. TRAFFIC REPORT A traffic analysis of the proposed development has been prepared by Abend Associates and will be submitted under separate cover. SITE ANALYSIS REPORT COMPREHENSIVE PERMIT APPLICATION RUGGED ROAD & SCOTTS WAY NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS April 30, 2003 Prepared for Owner & Applicant: RUGGED SCOTT, LLC. c/o RISING TIDE DEVELOPMENT, LLC. 32 ARLINGTON STREET CAMBRIDGE, MA 02140 Prepared by: CULLINAN ENGINEERING CO., INC. 10 RIVERSIDE DRIVE LAKEVILLE, MA 02347 508-946-9911 Job Number: 2023127 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION a. Street Network Plan b. USGS Locus Map H. SURROUNDING LAND USES III, EXISTING & PROPOSED STRUCTURES IV. SURFACE WATER RESOURCES V. GROUND WATER RESOURCES VI. DRAINAGE SYSTEM 1/ 1 ANIB210111 1 ' 1 VIII. VEGETATIVE COVER IX. TRAFFIC SAFETY & CONVENIENCE X. DEVELOPMENT PHASING XI. COMMON OPEN SPACES XII. PROJECT SUMMARY APPENDICES Drainage Analysis Data I. INTRODUCTION This report has been prepared for the proposed Rugged Road and Scotts Way Comprehensive Permit (40B) Application by Rugged Scotts LLC. The proposed project consists of a mixed density housing development consisting of 73 building lots, upon which will be constructed 72 single family homes and 1 clubhouse. Thirty-two (32) of the residential housing units will be constructed in two family buildings with a zero -lot fire wall separation between each unit. In this way the development will have the appearance of 56 residential buildings (40 stand-alone single family cottages, and 16 two- family buildings that will look like single family homes) and one clubhouse. The proposed project is located on the island of and in the Town of Nantucket, Massachusetts. The site is bounded to the north by Rugged Road, abutted to the east by limited residential development, bounded to the south by Scotts Way, and to the west by residential development and eventually Fairground Road. The site is shown on the Town of Nantucket Assessors map 67 as lots 170, 170.1, 170.2, and 170.3. The purpose of this report is to document existing and proposed site conditions consistent with the Nantucket Planning Boards Site Analysis Report requirements. This report is to be used as part of the submission requirements to the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) for approval of the Comprehensive Permit Application. II. SURROUNDING LAND USES The site and all abutting properties are zoned for residential use. There is an existing residential subdivision to the north of the site (Seikinnow Way) originating from Rugged Road containing approximately 18 lots. Abutting properties are partially developed with residential dwellings to the east and west of the site. There are 15 abutters to the site both direct and those located across roadways. The site is currently zoned Limited Use General (LUG -2). Current zoning requires a minimum lot size of 80,000 square feet and allows for a primary and a secondary dwelling on each lot. Adjacent and nearby parcels are also zoned for residential use with minimum required lot sizes ranging from 5000 to 20,000 -square feet. The proposed development would create 73 building lots with an average lot size of 4,898 square feet. III. EXISTING & PROPOSED STRUCTURES There are no known existing or previously demolished structures located on the site. The proposed development will contain 72 homes and one club house contained in 57 structures as tabulated below. The residential dwellings will vary in size and style in order to appeal to a wide range of potential owners and affordability. The buildings will consist of 40 single family structures, 16 two-family structures with the appearance of a single family home, and one clubhouse/community building. A minimum of twenty-five (251/o) percent of the units will be designated as affordable as required for a Comprehensive Permit. IV. SURFACE WATER RESOURCES The site does not contain or abut any known surface water resource areas. All proposed building lots would be connected to the municipal sewage treatment system. Connecting to the municipal sewage treatment system will negate adverse impacts to surface water resources. V. GROUND WATER RESOURCES The site is located within the Public Wellhead Recharge District as indicated on the Nantucket Water Resources Protection Plan. Drinking water for the proposed project would be provided from the Wannacomet Water Company via connection to an existing water line within Rugged Road. The development will include the construction of water lines within the site. A waterline extension from Fairgrounds Road via Scotts Way connecting with the site's water network is also proposed, thus establishing a looped system within Fairgrounds Road, Scotts Way and Rugged Road. All proposed building lots would be provided with connections to the municipal sewer system. The receiving sewer collection system within Rugged Road has sufficient capacity to accommodate the additional flow from this project. The capacity of the municipal wastewater treatment facility is currently under review by the Nantucket Department of Public Works and the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (DEP). Connecting to the municipal sewer system will negate adverse impacts to ground water resources. The proponent will be submitting to the Nantucket Department of Public Works and the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) for a sewer extension permit for the construction of the proposed sewer infrastructure upon receipt of a Comprehensive Permit from the Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals. Stormwater runoff will be treated through the use of stormwater management Best Management Practices (BMP's). The anticipated BMP's to be used within the proposed drainage system include deep sump hooded catch basins, oil and water separators, and underground infiltration systems. The proposed infiltration system will recharge all runoff from the proposed subdivision thereby ensuring that pre -development stormwater runoff and recharge rates are met. SCHEDULE OF BUILDING UNITS Housing Type # of Buildings # of Housing Units Bedrooms per Unit Total # of Bedrooms Cottage A 19 19 4 76 Cottage B 14 14 3 42 Cottage C 4 4 2 8 Barn D 3 1 3 3 9 Two Family A 8 16 3 48 Two Family B 8 16 8-3BRs 8-2BRs 40 Clubhouse 1 - - - Total �7172 - 223 IV. SURFACE WATER RESOURCES The site does not contain or abut any known surface water resource areas. All proposed building lots would be connected to the municipal sewage treatment system. Connecting to the municipal sewage treatment system will negate adverse impacts to surface water resources. V. GROUND WATER RESOURCES The site is located within the Public Wellhead Recharge District as indicated on the Nantucket Water Resources Protection Plan. Drinking water for the proposed project would be provided from the Wannacomet Water Company via connection to an existing water line within Rugged Road. The development will include the construction of water lines within the site. A waterline extension from Fairgrounds Road via Scotts Way connecting with the site's water network is also proposed, thus establishing a looped system within Fairgrounds Road, Scotts Way and Rugged Road. All proposed building lots would be provided with connections to the municipal sewer system. The receiving sewer collection system within Rugged Road has sufficient capacity to accommodate the additional flow from this project. The capacity of the municipal wastewater treatment facility is currently under review by the Nantucket Department of Public Works and the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (DEP). Connecting to the municipal sewer system will negate adverse impacts to ground water resources. The proponent will be submitting to the Nantucket Department of Public Works and the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) for a sewer extension permit for the construction of the proposed sewer infrastructure upon receipt of a Comprehensive Permit from the Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals. Stormwater runoff will be treated through the use of stormwater management Best Management Practices (BMP's). The anticipated BMP's to be used within the proposed drainage system include deep sump hooded catch basins, oil and water separators, and underground infiltration systems. The proposed infiltration system will recharge all runoff from the proposed subdivision thereby ensuring that pre -development stormwater runoff and recharge rates are met. VI. DRAINAGE SYSTEM The drainage system will be designed in compliance with the Nantucket Planning Board Regulations; and importantly, the projected existing peak stormwater runoff rate will not be exceeded upon completion of the proposed development. The proposed drainage system will be designed to store and infiltrate the entire stormwater runoff volume occurring from a 25 -year 24-hour storm event. Catch basins along the proposed roadway will collect runoff entering the roadway system. The drainage network will then route the entire collected runoff into the underground storage and infiltration system where it will be retained for infiltration. Therefore, the post - development conditions will result in a net decrease of surface runoff leaving the property. See appendix for preliminary drainage analysis. Methodology The proposed drainage system will be designed according to the requirements of the Nantucket Planning Board Regulations. The following policies and design aides will also be referred to for the design of the proposed drainage improvements: • Department of Environmental Protection Stormwater Management Policy Artificial Recharge: Evaluation and Guidance to Municipalities: A Guide to Stormwater Infiltration Practice in Public Water Supply Areas of Massachusetts, as prepared by the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission. VII. FLOOD HAZARD The site is not located within any known flood hazard areas as shown on the flood insurance rate map for the Town of Nantucket. Please refer to the following Flood Insurance Rate Map for further information: Town of Nantucket, Massachusetts, Nantucket County, community panel number 250230 0012D, as revised November 6, 1996. VIII. VEGETATIVE COVER The site is very densely wooded with scrub oak and pitch pine. Development of the site will require the removing almost all interior vegetation. Portions of existing vegetation along the perimeter of the site will be maintained as a natural buffer to the maximum possible. Upon completion of the site infrastructure improvements the proponent intends to fully landscape all disturbed areas. Shade trees will be planted along the proposed roadways as required by the Subdivision Regulations. Public scenic and view easement will not be provided as there are no substantial unique natural features or views provided from within this property. IX. TRAFFIC SAFETY & CONVENIENCE The site will be accessed by Rugged Road and Scotts Way. Part of the site access will consist of the reconstruction of approximately 860 -feet of Scotts Way. Scotts Way will be reconstructed from a dirt road to a 20 -foot paved road with an 8 -foot bike path. The proposed lots will be accessed by the construction of approximately 2,200 -feet of new on site roadway. On site traffic circulation will be provided by 5 new roadways, indicated by A through E on the site plans, totaling approximately 2,200 -feet. Road A, approximately 915 -feet long, is paved to 24 -feet and provides two-way circulation traversing through the site and linking Rugged Road with Scotts Way. Road B, approximately 645 -feet long, is paved to 20 -feet and provides one-way traffic circulation diverging from Road A and terminating at Rugged Road. Road C, approximately 220 -feet long, consists of a 16 -foot wide crushed shell surface and is a one-way roadway joining Road B to Road A at the northerly side of the site. Roads D and E are paved to 20 -feet and end with a "T" turnaround. Sidewalks will be provided on a minimum of one side of roads A and B to aid in safe pedestrian movement throughout the site. Sidewalks will be a minimum width of 4 -feet and will be designed and constructed in compliance with the requirements of the Massachusetts Architectural Access Board (521 CMR). A bike path is proposed as part of the reconstructed segment of Scotts Way. The sidewalks will provide easy access to the adjacent bicycle paths along Rugged Road and Scotts Way. Shared driveways, surfaced with crushed shells, are proposed to access rear lots and also provide parking. A minimum of two parking spaces have been provided for each unit. Guest and overflow parking will be available one side only on Roads A and B. Please refer to a separate traffic impact study report for detailed information regarding traffic related impacts. X. DEVELOPMENT PHASING The proponent anticipates construction of the roadway system and associated utilities to begin in the spring of 2004. However, the proponent reserves the right to alter this time frame as necessary. In order to facilitate the construction of affordable housing the proponent will be requesting an exception from any required phased construction and development requirements. The anticipated construction completion date for the project has not been determined and will be a function of the demand. XI. COMMON OPEN SPACES The project will provide limited open space areas along the borders of the site as well as within an interior parcel of land that will contain a common area, clubhouse, and swimming pool. Use of the clubhouse and swimming pool will be restricted to residents and their invitees. The clubhouse and pool are proposed in the center of the project to provide recreational activities for residents. A small shop selling sundries such as coffee, newspapers, basic grocery items, ice cream, and other miscellaneous items marketed primarily to the residents of the development may be included in the clubhouse/ community building. The addition of such a shop within the development is a community enhancing amenity and will aid in reducing the amount of traffic generated from residents of the development. XII. PROJECT SUMMARY The project design incorporates measures to reduce its impact on the Town of Nantucket and the environment. This report identifies the applicable areas set forth within the Planning Board Regulations as they apply to this site. Existing vegetation along the borders of the site will be maintained to the maximum extent practicable in order to provide a natural buffer to abutting properties. Scotts Way will be reconstructed to a paved roadway with a bicycle path. Substantial drainage improvements are proposed within the site and Scotts Way to aid in recharging the groundwater aquifer and to protect it from pollutants. The internal roadway system is designed to provide for safe and convenient traffic operations through the use of common shared drives, limited on -street parking, and handicap accessible sidewalks. A clubhouse and pool is proposed in the center of the project to provide recreational activities for homeowners association members and their invitees. The subject areas discussed in this report were referred to during the preliminary design of the project. The project would create much needed affordable housing thereby benefiting current and future residents, and the community. DRAINAGE ANALYSIS DATA Methodology The proposed drainage system will be designed according to the requirements of the Nantucket Planning Board Regulations. The following policies and design aides will also be referred to for the design of the proposed drainage improvements: • Department of Environmental Protection Stormwater Management Policy • Artificial Recharge: Evaluation and Guidance to Municipalities: A Guide to Stormwater Infiltration Practice in Public Water Supply Areas of Massachusetts, as prepared by the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission. The drainage system for this project will be designed using the following methods: the HydroCadO Stormwater Modeling System, the Barnstable Method, and Manning's Equation. The HydroCadO Stormwater Modeling System will be used to quantify stormwater runoff for pre and post -development conditions. The HydroCadO program utilizes Natural Resource Conservation Service (MRCS) techniques (TR -20) to predict stormwater runoff for given design storms. The calculations performed by HydroCadO are based on the NRCS model return frequency Type III distribution and a 25 -year design storm. The Barnstable Drainage Method will be utilized to determine an acceptable soil infiltration rate based on soil types and percolation test results. The National Resource Conservation Service (MRCS) Soil Survey for Nantucket County lists the site as Evesboro sand (EvA), which is soil drainage class type A. This type of soil is very well suited for the use of infiltration systems. Manning's Equation will be used to determine the required pipe sizes within the collection system. Storage & Infiltration System (SIS) HydroCad® was utilized to model the subcatchment contributing stormwater to the storage and infiltration system (SIS). The subcatchment is routed to a HydroCad® pond model that simulates the SIS. The SIS consists of 1-1/2" crushed stones with 40% assumed void space and corrugated polyethylene perforated drainage pipes. A stage discharge curve is created for the SIS based on the infiltration rate taken from the Barnstable Method. After entering the required data the model is complete and the program is executed to determine if the size of the SIS to attenuate the storm runoff is adequate. The HydroCae pond model provides the maximum water elevation, volume stored, and infiltration rate attained. Oil and Water Separators Oil and water separators will be sized based on the Stormwater Management Policy and the report from the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission. These policies and guidelines state that 400 -cubic feet of storage per contributing acre of impervious area be provided within the tank. The following information was used in performing the calculations for the drainage system. NRCS Soils Information The NRCS Soil Survey for Nantucket County lists the site as Evesboro sand (EvA). The NRCS drainage class for this soil type is A. Based on record septic system design soil evaluations conducted throughout the region, it is confirmed that the site's correct specific drainage classification is "A". Please refer to the appendices for copies of the NRCS soil survey map and soil evaluation records of proposed septic system designs. 1. Existing & Proposed Ground Covers: The existing ground cover for the site consists of a densely wooded forest of pine trees and scrub oak. The Curve Numbers listed below, hydrologic soil type A, were used in all the calculations performed with HydroCae. RUNOFF CURVE NUMBERS Cover Description Cover Type Hydrologic condition Curve Number Dense Grass, Woods Good 30 Landscaping, Lawns Good 39 Dirt Road Good 72 Gravel Road Good 76 Roofto s, Pavements - 98 2. Rainfall Data (24 Hour Storm Duration*) Storm Event Rainfall 25 -Year 5.9 inches * From U.S. Department of Commerce Weather Bureau T.P. 40, May 1961., see attached. FSE '03 JUN 19 P 2 :04 TOWN CLEkt TOWN OF NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS E IVSD E L :ASSESSORS APR 3 0 2003 -)VVIR! OF i-UCKET, MA LIST OF PARTIES IT INTEREST IN Tl✓- MATTER Or THE PETITION OF PROPERTY OWNER:....i�U-G�rA------------------------------------------- MAILING ADDRESS ................. .................................. .......... (.. PROPERTY LOCATION:--� �� --- --� - ASSESSORS MAP/PARCEL:..�L cc ; r tk (vim �� C u L�czL Scow -ffA A i�� SUBMITTED BY:. �'a�._�.................. T` !'` SEE AT-, ACHED PAGES I cenifi that the foregoi it list of persora who are o\\ners of aburting ? fope.� pu�'ic or .ate sweet or ��av aSle abutters of the abutters an li C:r.c' directI opposite on an,, , p� %\mer s prop , ail as t : land o•• ,,ers �•ithin three h n reo fee: of II -le Drop,-,T)'line of oer}e� o on the r :ost recent appl:cabie tax tis' (i\/i.G L. c. 40A, Sectaor. 1 1 Zon!ng Code Chap:<' i =� Sectio:: 139-29D (2) ) DAT_ ASSESSOR'S 0F: iC" TO\VN OF NAN T jC'K;�— J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J p b J N H O W N H O J N H N m g U A It 1/ A yy0 ?yx 1 1%) 4 11 .1 1 1 1/ 1 5 z n x n x o nx 0 0 r C r z a a a [9 ca a o a tl� z H H O 0 Gyy] Gyy] o $gm f9 % % n n 'J nr H ,[tlUg1 N S H o o ro x Q fa 7e H Y raz] rro iii x W (°n n n (OxC� �ypa ro n hyo o z H z HZ4m 10,,fro N n x y p y y Hn 4 4 p N H x y H ro H H P N H a O N 0 R W OO l+ lV M N I [7 H $ a 0 oa Zy x Y p M r `' H "' H H m n z O N O N N K K K 10 H O 00 b 0�0 N m N N or, rq 0 0 m X H 'p •1 7 Ha HHCHH M .ro W N MH m N m 3 - H O O b 7 px yy 3� m y 3C a H A A A U m H H { H� H H Ey H x M yy yy m H K K - S � A A A AA.. X07 ro ro U W U A ro H N ro W U U n ro 0 ro N N N 0 0 m 0 i O o 0 0\ O '9 O U o O, Fyyj y x xam �"y"0x�?�aX x ��ao H H n iC O r J '4�a W m 10 A N O F A b n N H N F U 7pnl CZ C O Gei /� U� F' q t {q U ,r �► H O O '� i tl O cd M [d y H ro ro K :� o td TG. r r y o �p y1 C m O is y m y ui C L4 m + o ro0 i� z W o o o G1 x x x w w W W W A A i p H a W Y Q Q n m m m u t� t�qq 1pq� SOC t n �Km 0 n 0 P ON 0 ON K H„ H H H H H H H H H H H pl W O p 0 0 + 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N O N N N N N N N N N N N U U U U J U U U U U O U YI U U U U U U U U U b A i A O i t i t i H i i i i i i i A i i i N t UI W Y g q q q p H q U m OJ H H N N N W U ro N i g m N O O m 0 O A U O A 71 x x f/ x N H H pnyoHO2 H oy nOx 08 go O% O �rOY O tl 17 CC n r r r r r Uw X00 �w �u0, �0o }0 pw }w o I�W7 /fI Ao�� jve4f f � Z6p4-,#-— 057-63 SI -17/Y �CaGu� G cu2rn— aT ;C,e r .A Joseph M. Guay E -Mail: JosephMGuay®aol.com Of Counsel Michael Pearson, MaA E -Mail: AttorneyMPearson®aol.com VIA HAND DELIVERY JOSEPH M. GUAY ATTORNEY AT LAW 108 Surfside Road P.O. Box 1294 Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554-1294 Patricia R. Church, Clerk Magistrate Commonwealth of Massachusetts Nantucket Superior Court Department Nantucket Town and County Building 16 Broad Street, Second Floor P.O. Box 967 Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554-00967 Dear Ms. Church: June 10, 2004 Telephone (508) 825-9099 Facsimile (508) 825-9199 RE: Lisa P. Dias, and Kenneth F. Dias and Lisa P. Dias, Trustees of Daisey Nominee Trust, Peter Paul Meerbergen and Nantucket Land Council, Inc. V. Town of Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals, Edward J. Sanford, Chairman, C. Richard Loftin, Edward Murphy, Nancy J. Sevrens, David R. Wiley, Michael J. O'Mara, Dale Waine and Edward S. Toole, as members thereof, and Rugged Scott, LLC In regard to the above -styled action, please find enclosed for filing with the Nantucket Superior Court, the following: 1. Complaint (attached certified Zoning Board of Appeals Decision and Exhibits); 2. Superior Court Civil Action Sheet; and 3. Check No. 3134, in the amount of $270.00, representing the filing fee for costs. By copy of this correspondence, I am this date filing a copy of the Complaint with certificate copy of the Zoning Board of Appeals Decision and Exhibits with the office of the Nantucket Town Clerk. Patricia R. Church, Clerk Magistrate June 10, 2004 Page Two Thank you for your cooperation and attention. Very truly yours, Josep luay JMG:Imd Enclosures cc via hand delivery: Nantucket Town Clerk cc via Constable and via certified mail/return receipt requested and/or first class mail: Linda F. Williams, Administrator, Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals Edward J. Sanford, Chairman Mr. C. Richard Loftin Mr. Edward Murphy Ms. Nancy J. Sevrens Mr. David R. Wiley Mr. Michael J. O'Mara Mr. Dale Waine Mr. Edward S. Toole Rugged Scott, LLC Joshua Posner, Resident Agent cc via first class mail: Mr. and Mrs. Kenneth F. Dias Mr. Peter Paul Meerbergen Nantucket Land Council, Inc. Peter R. Fenn, Esquire Jonathan D. Witten, Esquire COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS NANTUCKET, SS. LISA P. DIAS, and KENNETH F. DIAS LISA P. DIAS, TRUSTEES, of DAISEY NOMINEE TRUST, and PETER PAUL MEERBERGEN, and NANTUCKET LAND COUNCIL, INC., PLAINTIFFS, V. TOWN OF NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, EDWARD J. SANFORD, CHAIRMAN, C. RICHARD LOFTIN, EDWARD MURPHY, NANCY J. SEVRENS, DAVID R. MICHAEL J. O'MARA, DALE W. WAINE and EDWARD S. TOOLE, as members thereof, and RUGGED SCOTT, LLC., DEFENDANTS. A. Introduction COMPLAINT SUPERIOR COURT DOCKET NO. This is an action on appeal pursuant to M.G.L., Chapter 40B, Section 21, proceeding under M.G.L., Chapter 40A, Section 17, to annul a decision by the Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals, Decision No. 051-03, (hereinafter referred to as the "Decision"), in connection with an Application filed on April 30, 2003, with the Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals by Defendant, Rugged Scott, LLC, a company organized under the laws of the State of Delaware and registered in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The Plaintiffs, jointly and severally, in this action on appeal are Lisa P. Dias, individually, Kenneth F. Dias and Lisa P. Dias, Trustees of Daisey Nominee Trust, Peter Paul Meerbergen, individually, and the Nantucket Land Council, Inc., a non-profit Massachusetts corporation. The party Plaintiffs named herein are sometimes referred to separately, as defined hereinbelow, or jointly/collectively referred to as "Plaintiffs". The original Application filed with the Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals by Defendant, Rugged Scott, LLC requested approval for a Comprehensive Permit pursuant to M.G.L., Chapter 40B, Sections 20-23, (the "Application"), for the construction of seventy-two (72) residential housing units proposed to be constructed in a housing development project known as the Rugged Scott LLC Development (hereinafter referred to as the "Development"). The location of the real estate that is the locus of the residential development project under said Application filed by Defendant, Rugged Scott L LC, is located in an area of Nantucket Island bounded by private ways known as Rugged Road and Scott's Way in the Town of Nantucket. The site of the subject locus is a vacant parcel of land with an area of approximately 10+ acres and is comprised of lots now known and numbered as 15 and 19 Rugged Road, and 6 and 8 Scott's Way, Town and County of Nantucket Massachusetts (Nantucket Assessors Map 67, Parcels 170, 170.1, 170.2 and 170.3; Plan Book 21, Page 106, Lots 19A, 19B, 19C and 19D. Said parcel of vacant land comprising the four (4) lots referenced hereinabove is hereinafter referred to as the "Property". B. Parties 1. Plaintiff, Lisa P. Dias, individually and Kenneth F. Dias and Lisa P. Dias, Trustees of Daisey Nominee Trust, u/d/t dated February 17, 2004, (hereinafter collectively referred to in the singular as "Dias"), with an address of 25 Rugged Road, Town and County of Nantucket, Massachusetts, 2. Plaintiff, Peter Paul Meerbergen, (hereinafter referred to as "Meerbergen"), with an address of 20 Rugged Road, Town and County of Nantucket, Massachusetts. 3. Plaintiff, Nantucket Land Council, Inc., (hereinafter referred to as "NLC") with an address of 6 Ash Lane, Nantucket, Massachusetts. 4. Defendant, Town of Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals, (hereinafter referred to as the "Board") is the duly appointed Zoning Board of Appeals in and for the Town of Nantucket serving as the local permitting granting authority under the provisions of General Laws Chapter 40A, et seq; members or associate members of the Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals, are named as Defendants in their official capacity as members of the Board which is the subject of this action, and their names and addresses are as follows: Edward J. Sanford, Chairman, an individual with an address of 3 Mill Street and 5 South Beach Street, Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554; C. Richard Loftin, an individual with an address of 36 Madaket Road and 14 Easy Street, Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554-0602; Edward Murphy, an individual with an address of 3 Spring Street, Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554; Nancy J. Sevrens, an individual with and address of 2 Vesper Lane, Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554-2458; David R. Wiley, an individual with an address of 68 Union Street, Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554; Michael J. O'Mara, an individual with an address of 240 Polpis Road, Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554; Dale Waine, an individual with an address of 11 Bishop's Rise, Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554; and Edward S. Toole, an individual with an address of 28 Burnell Street, Siasconset, Massachusetts 02564. Defendants listed in Paragraph 3 above are duly appointed members of the Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals. Board members Sanford, Loftin, Murphy, Sevrens and Wiley presided over the Application by Defendant, Rugged Scott, LLC, and rendered the Decision to approve a Comprehensive Permit permitting forty (40) residential housing units. The Board has a mailing address of 37 Washington Street, Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554. 6. Defendant, Rugged Scott LLC, is a Foreign Limited Liability Company duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware and registered in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts with its principal place of business being 2711 Centerville Road, Suite 400, Wilmington, Delaware, 19808. The Resident Agent of Rugged Scott, LLC., is Joshua Posner, who resides at 32 Arlington Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 02140. C. Jurisdiction 7. Plaintiffs Complaint herein is an appeal by the Plaintiffs, jointly and severally, as aggrieved persons of Decision No. 051-03, issued by the Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals, and such appeal is taken pursuant to, and in accordance with, the provisions of M.G.L., Chapter 40B, Section 21, M.G.L., Chapter 40A, Section 17, and M.G.L., Chapter 231A. D. Facts Plaintiff, Dias, is a resident of Nantucket and title owner of real estate situated at 25 Rugged Road, Nantucket, Massachusetts and is a person (abutter) aggrieved by the granting of the Decision by the Board. 9. Plaintiff, Meerbergen, is a resident of Nantucket and title owner of real estate situated at 20 Rugged Road, Nantucket, Massachusetts and is a person (abutter) aggrieved by the granting of the Decision by the Board. 10. Plaintiff, NLC, is a duly qualified non-profit Massachusetts corporation (with approximately 2000 dues paying members), duly qualified as a tax exempt organization pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §501 (c)(3), which works to preserve the natural resources and environment of the Island of Nantucket; NLC maintains an office at 6 Ash Lane, Nantucket, Massachusetts; NLC owns interests in many parcels of land on Nantucket, including substantial parcels in Squam, Plains, North Pasture, Smooth Hummocks and many other sections of Nantucket Island and most of the members of NLC are landowners and homeowners on Nantucket Island. 11. Defendants, Edward J. Sanford, C. Richard Loftin, Edward Murphy, Nancy J. Sevrens, David R. Wiley, Michael J. O'Mara, Dale W. Waine and Edward S. Toole are members of the Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals acting in their official capacity and Board Members Sanford, Loftin, Murphy, Sevrens and Wiley constituted the Board panel sitting in review of the Application by Defendant, Rugged Scott LLC, which is the subject of this action. 12. Defendant, Rugged Scott LLC., is the named Applicant under said Application and claims title ownership of the subject locus Property situated at, and now known and numbered as 15 and 19 Rugged Road and 6 and 8 Scott's Way, Town and County of Nantucket, Massachusetts, herein defined and referred to as the Property. 13. The Property is situated in the Limited Use General -2 (LUG -2) Zoning District of the Town and County of Nantucket, Massachusetts, and is shown as 15 and 19 Rugged Road and 6 and 8 Scott's Way, Nantucket, Massachusetts (Map 67, Parcels 170, 170.1, 170.2 and 170.3; Plan Book 21, Page 106, Lot Nos. 19A, 19B, 19C and 19D. 14. Defendant, Rugged Scott, LLC, in its original Application submitted to the Board for consideration and approval, represents it will be a limited dividend organization eligible to receive subsidy under state or federal affordable housing programs and thereby qualified to submit and proceed with its Application for a Comprehensive Permit under M.G.L. Chapter 40B. 15. The subject Property site is wooded vacant land located in a residential area of Nantucket Island abutted by single family residential dwellings and is bordered by private ways known as Rugged Road and Scott's Way. 16. On or about April 30, 2003, Defendant, Rugged Scott LLC, herein sometimes referred to as the Applicant, filed an Application, pursuant to M.G.L., Chapter 40B, Sections 20 — 23, for a Comprehensive Permit for the construction of seventy two (72) dwelling units in single family and duplex structures. The Application filed by the Applicant provided for a planned housing community and requested approval from the Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals for a Comprehensive Permit under M.G.L. Chapter 40B permitting construction and development of seventy two (72) residential dwelling units on the subject Property site. 17. The original Application filed by Defendant, Rugged Scott, LLC, provided for the proposed construction of seventy-two (72) residential dwelling units consisting of forty (40) single-family dwellings and sixteen (16) two-family dwellings, developed with a loan from the Massachusetts Housing Finance Agency. 18. The original Application for the construction and development of seventy two (72) dwelling units, provided for twenty-five (25%) percent or eighteen (18) units to be sold as affordable housing in accordance with applicable guidelines and to be made available for families with incomes not exceeding eighty (80%) percent of the annual median income of the Nantucket area. An additional thirteen (13%) percent or nine (9) units to be sold to middle income buyers earning up to about one hundred and twenty (120%) of the annual median income of the Nantucket area. The remaining sixty three (63%) percent of the homes or forty five (45) units were to be sold without restriction. 19. A Public Hearing on the Application was first held in the Large Group Instruction Room of the Nantucket High School on July 31, 2003, and was continued for further Public Hearing(s) scheduled on September 25, 2003, October 30, 2003, November 20, 2003, December 17, 2003, January 29, 2003. February 19, 2004 and March 17, 2004. The Public Hearing(s) were closed on March 17, 2004. 20. Plaintiffs, individually and through representatives, legal counsel, staff and consultants, together with numerous other area residents and interested parties in the Nantucket community, attended and participated in the Public Hearing(s) held by the Board and contributed comments, testimony, materials, opinions, expertise and concerns regarding the proposed Development contemplated by the Application submitted by Defendant, Rugged Scott, LLC. (The audio tapes and minutes of the several Public Hearing(s) on said Application are lengthy and the oral testimony, written materials, documents, plans and all other pertinent information and documentation produced, presented and considered at the Public Hearing(s) is too voluminous to recite in this Complaint; therefore, Plaintiffs hereby incorporate by reference herein, and make a part hereof, in support of Plaintiffs Complaint, all audio and video tapes of oral testimony and all documents and materials produced and/or presented at the Public Hearing(s) on said Application.) 21. On May 25, 2004, the Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals issued Decision No. 051-03, and said Decision, with conditions and attached Exhibits, was filed with the office of the Nantucket Town Clerk on May 25, 2004. The Decision issued by the Board approved a Comprehensive Permit allowing for the Development project to construct no more than forty (40) detached single-family residential dwelling units, comprised of twenty-six (26) market rate units, ten (10) units classified and qualified as "affordable housing" dwellings and four (4) units classified as "middle income" dwellings, all held in fee simple, subject to certain conditions and restrictions as more particularly set forth in the Decision. A certified copy of the Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals Decision No. 051-03, is attached hereto marked Exhibit "A" and incorporated by reference herein. COUNTI (M.G.L., c.40B, s.21) E. Board Proceedings 22. Plaintiffs restate and re -allege all allegations contained and set forth in the aforesaid Paragraphs 1- 21, as if more fully set forth herein. 23. M.G.L. Chapter 40B, Section 20 and 760 CMR 31.01 (1)(a), require that an applicant for a comprehensive permit under M.G.L. Chapter 40B, Sections 20-23, must be a public agency, a non-profit organization or a limited dividend organization. Upon information and belief, Defendant Rugged Scott, LLC., is not a public agency nor a non-profit organization, and by its own admission was not a limited dividend organization at the time of submission of its Application before the Board. 24. The action of the Board was erroneous, arbitrary and capricious in that the Board allowed Defendant Rugged Scott, LLC to file and maintain an application for a Comprehensive Permit before the Board when it knew, or should have known, that Defendant Rugged Scott, LLC was not a limited dividend organization and that limited dividend status was required by both the statute and relevant regulations. 25. M.G.L. Chapter 40B, Sections 20-23 and 760 CMR 31.01 (1) and (2) requires an applicant for a comprehensive permit to apply for, obtain and present a Project Eligibility (Site Approval) determination relevant to the particular project as a pre- requisite to proceeding. 26. The action of the Board was erroneous, arbitrary and capricious in that the Board allowed Defendant, Rugged Scott, LLC to file and maintain its Application for a Comprehensive Permit before the Board and Town, without Defendant Rugged Scott, LLC being in receipt of a sufficient valid Project Eligibility (Site Approval) as required by M.G.L. Chapter 40B, Sections 20-23 and relevant regulations (760 CMR 31.01, et seq.). Moreover, the Applicant failed to satisfy the requirements under 760 CMR 31.01 et seq., relating to regulatory subsidizing of the Development and establish the specific financial resources relied upon by the Applicant for the construction of such Development. The Board should have denied or dismissed the Application. 27. The Board issued its Decision based upon insufficient information and materials necessary to approve the Comprehensive Permit for forty (40) dwelling units. The Board deemed it necessary to have the benefit of a forty dwelling units (40) pro forma. The Board, on several occasions, requested the Applicant to produce such a pro forma for forty (40) dwelling units. The Applicant failed to provide the document as requested and the Board made its decision without the required information and documentation. 28. The action of the Board was erroneous, arbitrary and capricious in that the Board, proceeded without benefit of a pro forma from the Defendant, Rugged Scott, LLC, for a forty (40) dwellings Development or a pro forma developed by the Board sufficient to arrive at the density allowed by its Decision and the waivers approved by its Decision and the Board issued its Decision based on the random picking of numbers and random granting of waivers which exceeds its authority and is not in accordance with applicable regulations and law. 29. The action of the Board was erroneous, arbitrary and capricious in that the Board failed to act in accordance with its own stated aims and objectives. The Board repeatedly stated that there was a need for median income units, as opposed to low income units, and the Board requested the Applicant to increase the proposed median income units. However, the Board failed to proportionately increase the number of median income units when it made its final Decision. 30. The action of the Board was erroneous, arbitrary and capricious in that the Board failed to act objectively in its proceedings and in reaching its Decision. The Board had conflicting interests inasmuch as it had an interest in the profitability of the Applicant's Development as particularly set forth in the Decision issued by said Board. The Board was not able to conduct the Public Hearing proceedings with impartiality and was predisposed to grant a Comprehensive Permit to the Applicant. 31. The Decision by the Board grants waivers or exemptions from the Town of Nantucket's Zoning Bylaw and applicable regulations. The waivers and exemptions permitted by the Board constitute a threat to public health, safety and welfare, exceed the Board's authority under M.G. L. Chapter 40B, Sections 20-23 and were granted arbitrarily and capriciously, constitute an abuse of discretion and were made upon an unlawful procedure and are not in accordance with applicable regulations and law. 32. Defendant, Rugged Scott, LLC, has failed to meet its affirmative obligation to demonstrate the need for the requested waivers to avoid the proposed Project from becoming "uneconomic". 33. The action of the Board was erroneous, arbitrary and capricious in that the Board approved the Comprehensive Permit in its Decision allowing the Applicant to construct a clubhouse / pool / lawn / tennis court facility in addition to approving the construction of 40 dwelling units. The decision by the Board was contrary to the spirit and letter of M.G.L. Chapter 40B. The legislative intent for regional planning under M.G.L. Chapter 40B was to provide for low and median (affordable) income housing and it was not the intent of the legislature to create a community recreational facility. 34. The action of the Board was erroneous, arbitrary and capricious in that the Board failed to allow the Plaintiffs, jointly and severally, and the general public sufficient time to make representations and produce plans and documents in the course of the Board proceedings and gave a disproportionate amount of time to the Applicant and its witnesses to present its arguments in support of the Application. 35. The action of the Board was erroneous, arbitrary and capricious in that the Board failed to give any, or any reasonable consideration to documents and materials submitted by the Plaintiffs, jointly and severally, and the general public. COUNT II (M.G.L., c.40B, s.21) F. Board Decision Density/Zoning/Plannin2/Desi2n 36. Plaintiffs restate and reallege all allegations contained and set forth in the aforesaid Paragraphs 1- 35, as if more fully set forth herein. 37. The Zoning District in which the property site is located is classified as Limited Use General -2 (LUG- 2). The LUG -2 Zoning District requires a minimum area of 80,000 square feet and limits ground cover to 4% of such area. The Property site is approximately 10 acres allowing for 5 buildable lots under current zoning. The construction of one residential dwelling on each buildable lot would result in a density of 5 residential dwellings permitted under current zoning. The construction of one primary dwelling and one secondary dwelling on each of the buildable lots would result in a maximum of 10 dwellings on the property site permitted under current zoning. The Decision by the Board approving the construction of 40 dwelling units is equal to a minimum of four hundred (400%) percent (or 4 times) and a maximum of eight hundred (800%) percent (or eight times) of the housing density currently allowed by zoning which is a significant and substantial change in the character of said zoning designation and has an extreme negative impact on the neighborhood. Moreover, the approved Comprehensive Permit for forty (40) dwelling units and a clubhouse / pool / lawn / tennis court facility would significantly increase the groundcover on the Property site in excess of the allowed groundcover under current zoning. 38. M.G.L., Chapter 40B, allows for a "limited override" of existing zoning requirements. The Decision by the Board creates a significant and substantial override of the current zoning regulations in zoning district LUG -2. 39. Upon information and belief, the Board's determination that forty (40) units of housing was appropriate for the Property site was not based upon a review or analysis of an independent pro forma or other financial information prepared by legal counsel or a consultant retained by the Board, nor a pro forma from the Applicant for the forty (40) dwelling units approved by the Board. 40. Upon information and belief, the Board requested no assistance, conducted no independent investigation nor made any determination to resolve the significant disparity in the proceedings regarding establishing a basis for an acceptable density for the proposed Development. 41. Upon information and belief, the Board produced no evidence and the Decision contains no indication of any deliberations that any pro forma submitted for the project was accurate or sufficient. 42. Upon information and belief, the Board did not review or sufficiently review, nor have others review or sufficiently review on its behalf, architectural plans or engineering documents enabling it to conclude the impact forty (40) dwelling units would have during or after construction upon abutting real properties, including the impact of wastewater disposal, shadows, massing, height, bulk, views or privacy. 43. The Decision by the Board allowed for the rental of the 26 market rate units which would further adversely impact the neighborhood in which the property site is located and such Decision was erroneous, arbitrary and capricious. 44. The Decision by the Board was erroneous, arbitrary and capricious in that the Board failed to address or otherwise ignored the objections and comments by the aggrieved Plaintiffs and other aggrieved abutters, area residents and interested community persons regarding such planning issues as the inadequate access for vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians and sewer and water connection sufficient to service the proposed Development at the subject Property site. 45. The Decision by the Board was erroneous, arbitrary and capricious in that the Board failed to address or otherwise ignored the objections and comments by the aggrieved Plaintiffs and other aggrieved abutters, area residents and interested community persons regarding such planning and design issues as parking spaces, handicap access and parking, landscaping, buffer, vegetation and fencing screening, street lighting, emergency call boxes and fire hydrants, increased sewer and water demands, drainage conditions and overall road maintenance concerns created by the proposed Development at the subject Property site. 46. The Applicant, through its officers, advisers, and the purported experts testifying on its behalf, failed and refused to provide complete and sufficient materials and testimony for qualification as a M.G.L., Chapter 40B development and failed and refused to adequately and sufficiently address the site plan issues, road access issues, water and sewer issues, and the negative impact of such construction Development on the neighborhood. II Health/Safety/Environment 47. The Decision by the Board was erroneous, arbitrary and capricious in that the Board relied upon insufficient and inadequate testimony and materials submitted by the Applicant relating to the issue of increased vehicular and pedestrian traffic and safety concerns arising therefrom, resulting crime and damage and the amplification of congestion at the intersections of Rugged Road and Scott's Way with Fairground's Road and Surfside Road and Old South Road with Fairgrounds Road. 48. The Decision by the Board was erroneous, arbitrary and capricious in that the Board approved the Development, with conditions, however the conditions do not adequately protect the environmental resources of the Property site or those of the Plaintiff's real property and surrounding neighborhood. 49. The Decision by the Board was erroneous, arbitrary and capricious in that the Board relied upon insufficient and inadequate testimony and materials submitted by the Applicant relating to the issue of increased pollution (i.e., noise, vehicle, water and air) and the traffic and safety concerns arising therefrom. 50. Upon information and belief, the Board did not review or review sufficiently, nor have others review or review sufficiently on its behalf, plans or documents enabling it to determine the impact of forty (40) dwelling units and associated stormwater runoff or flooding would have during or after construction upon wetland, wildlife, rare and endangered species or other natural resources. 51. Upon information and belief, the Board did not review, or review sufficiently, nor have others review or review sufficiently on its behalf, plans or engineering documents enabling it to determine that the drainage system approved by the Decision would protect abutting property owners or owners of the proposed dwelling units from storm water runoff or flooding. 52. The Project site is located within the Public Wellhead Recharge Overlay District. Upon information and belief, the Board did not review, or review sufficiently, nor have others review, or review sufficiently on its behalf, plans, documents or information enabling it to determine that the proposed Development, as approved by the Board in its Decision, would not adversely affect or contaminate the sole source aquifer. 53. The Decision by the Board failed to give any consideration or sufficient weight to the report of Mainstream Engineering, Inc., dated February 25, 2004, as submitted to the Board, which report highlighted significant and substantial concerns regarding the Property site and recommended various conditions to be imposed upon the issuance of a Comprehensive Permit. 54. The Decision by the Board was erroneous, arbitrary and capricious in that said Decision failed to give sufficient weight to the evidence of the Town of Nantucket's Wastewater Consultant, and gave undue weight to the testimony of the Applicant's witness. 55. Upon information and belief, the Board did not review or review sufficiently, nor have reviewed for it, or reviewed sufficiently, plans or landscape drawings that could have reasonably informed the Board as to the limitations or deficiencies the landscape design might have in protecting abutting property owners from noise and dust onto Plaintiff's real property and or the property of other abutters. 56. The Decision by the Board was erroneous, arbitrary and capricious in that such Decision was made without benefit of sufficient and adequate "final" plans and materials upon which the Board could reasonably rely prior to approving the Comprehensive Permit for the Applicant to construct forty (40) dwelling units and a clubhouse / pool / lawn / tennis court facility on the Property site. Rather, the conditions imposed by the Board in its Decision approving the Comprehensive Permit under M.G.L. Chapter 40B, allows the Applicant to submit "final" plans and materials prior to the Defendant, Rugged Scott, LLC, making application for a building permit. The "final" plans and materials which the Board did not require the Applicant to present at the Public Hearing(s) for review and comments included a definitive sub -division plan, roadway plans, utility plans, sewer and water plans, grading and erosion control plans, architectural plans, lighting plans and landscape and planting plans. III Economic 57. The Decision by the Board was erroneous, arbitrary and capricious in that such Decision relied upon insufficient and inadequate testimony and materials submitted by the Applicant which entirely failed to take into consideration the extreme negative impact on the economy of the aggrieved Plaintiffs, other aggrieved abutters and area residents resulting from the approval of the Development including, without limitation, depreciation in value of existing properties in the neighborhood, increased demands, costs and obligations for municipal services such as water, sewer and electricity, reduction of open space and the alteration of existing single family residential neighborhood. 58. The Decision by the Board was erroneous, arbitrary and capricious in that the Board's determination of a profit limitation and regulatory agreement limitation of the Applicant's profit at 15% is not supported by any empirical evidence, market study or analysis. 59. The Decision by the Board was erroneous, arbitrary and capricious in that the Board approved the Comprehensive Permit for the construction of forty (40) dwelling units without sufficient testimony and materials to enable the Board to determine at what stage the Project would become "uneconomic". COUNT III (M.G.L., c.231A) 60. Plaintiffs restate and reallege all allegations contained and set forth in the aforesaid Paragraphs 1- 59, as if more fully set forth herein. 61. The action on appeal in the pending case involves an actual controversy between parties in that the Board has issued a Decision approving a Comprehensive Permit injurious to the Plaintiffs, jointly and severally. 62. A procedure for declaratory relief under M.G.L. Chapter 231A, Sections 1 and 2 is proper and appropriate to secure a judicial determination of rights, duties, status and other legal relations and a proper and appropriate procedure to enjoin and obtain a judicial determination of the legality of administrative practices and procedures including, without limitation, the practices and procedures of the Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals G. Prayer for Relief 63. Plaintiffs, Dias, Meerbergen and NLC, jointly and severally, claim to be aggrieved by the Comprehensive Permit Decision issued by the Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals in Decision No. 051-03, and hereby submit their appeal therefrom. Plaintiffs state that: a. The Application submitted by the Defendant, Rugged Scott LLC, including all oral testimony and written materials in support thereof, is inadequate and insufficient and fails to meet the requirements under M.G.L., Chapter 40B and 760 CMR, 31.01, et seq. b. The Comprehensive Permit, approved and granted by the Board, as set forth in the Decision, with conditions, creates a significant and substantial change in the Zoning District in which the subject Property site is located resulting in an extreme negative and adverse impact on the aggrieved Plaintiffs, aggrieved area residents and other interested persons in the Nantucket community. C. The Decision, including the conditions, as issued by the Board, exceeds the authority of the Board; and d. The Decision, including the conditions, as issued by the Board, is based on legally untenable grounds and is otherwise arbitrary and capricious. WHEREFORE, for the aforesaid reasons, Plaintiffs, Dias, Meerbergen and NLC, respectfully request this Court, after hearing on the above appeal, find, adjudge, declare and Order: a. That the Decision of the Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals, Decision No. 051-03, exceeds the authority of the Board; b. That the actions of the Board were arbitrary and capricious and the Decision issued by the Board is not founded on a rational basis or findings; C. That the Decision of the Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals, Decision No. 051-03, be annulled; d. That the proceedings before the Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals and Decision No. 051-03 issued by the Board is not proper nor legal and the enforcement of such Decision should be enjoined and annulled: and e. Grant all other relief that the Court deems just and appropriate including awarding Plaintiffs costs. Dated: June �� , 2004 PLAINTIFFS, Lisa Dias and Kenneth F. Dias and Lisa P. Dias, Trustees of Daisey Nominee Trust and Peter Paul Meerbergen, By Their Attorneys, Jo M. ay, Esquire .O. No.: 551814 Mi hael Pearson, Esquire B.B.O. No.: 659397 Of Counsel to Joseph M. Guay, Esquire P.O. Box 1294 108 Surfside Road Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Telephone: 508-825-9099 Facsimile: 508-825-9199 PLAINTIFF, Nantucket Land Council, Inc. By Its Attorney, P ter 'ffi squire B.O. No.: 16720 Peter R. Fenn & Associates 71 South Street Jamaica Plain, Massachusetts 02130 Telephone: 617-522-9292 Facsimile: 617-522-4120 VERIFICATION The undersigned state that each has read all of the provisions, paragraphs, and allegations set forth in the foregoing Complaint and further state that said Complaint is true and accurate to the best of their information and knowledge. Dated: June 16 , 2004 Lisa Dias, Individually and as Trustee of Daisey Nominee Trust A Peter Pa 41 e rbergen PLAINTIFFS HEREBY MAKE DEMAND FOR TRIAL BY JURY VERIFICATION The undersigned state that he/she has read all of the provisions, paragraphs, and allegations set forth in the foregoing Complaint and further state that said Complaint is true and accurate to the best of his/her information and knowledge. Dated: June /0 , 2004 NANTUCKET LAND COUNCIL, INC. By: PLAINTIFF HEREBY MAKES DEMAND FOR TRIAL BY JURY INDEX OF EXHIBITS A: List of Exceptions S. Application Materials, Supplemental Information, and Applicant Correspondence C: Capital Cost Pro Forma prepared by Edward Marchant 2/13/04 D. Clubhouse/Pool/Lawn/Tennis Facility -Non -Resident Eligibility Area E. Chart — Unit Program 2/19/04 EXHIBIT A LIST OF EXCEPTIONS (aka WAIVER LIST) (Please note: the following language that has been struck out are portions of requested exceptions that were not granted by the ZBA in this Decision.) Chapter 139. Zoning § 139-7.A. Exception to permit a clubhouse/community building, shop, within a Limited Use General -2 ("LUG -2") zoning district. Granted except for allowance of retail shop. See Clubhouse/Pool/Lawnyfennis Facility discussion at 3.2. o., page 11. § 139-12.13(3)(a). Exception from the requirement that the application be referred to the Nantucket Water Commission. Granted. Comments included. § 139-16.A. Exception from the Intensity Regulations as to lot area, frontage, setbacks and ground cover ratio. Granted. See 2.6, page 10. § 139-16.D. Exception from the regularity formula. Granted. § 139-18. Exception from on-site parking requirements for the lot, which will contain the proposed clubhouse. Granted. § 139-20. Exception from the provision of off-street loading facilities for the lot, which will contain the proposed clubhouse. Granted. § 139-20.1. Exception from the regulations as to driveway access. Granted to the extent necessary. See 3.2 n., page 13. § 139-23. Exception from the Site Plan Review provisions for the proposed clubhouse. Granted. § 139-24.A. Exception from the Phased Development provisions. Granted § 139.26.C. Exception from the requirements under clause (1) for submission of a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Historic District Commission applisahen. Granted for submission of final plans only. See discussion at 1. 4, page 6 RULES AND REGULATIONSGOVERNING THE SUBDIVISION OF LAND ISSUED BY THE N91,TU!QKET PLANNING BOARD § 2.06b(18). Exception to the required on-site disposal area. Granted. § 4.03a(l). Exception from the street width standards to allow pavement widths for the various proposed subdivision roadways of 16 feet (one-way road with no on street parking), 20 -feet (one- way road with on street parking limited to one side), 20 -feet (two-way road with no on street parking), and 24 -feet (two-way road with on street parking limited to one side). Granted. See discussion at 1.2.2, 1.2.3, 1.2.4. and 1. 25, page 6. § 4.03e. Exception from the minimum design standards for streets to allow the use of a 30 -foot right-of-way ("R.O.W.") in place of the required 40 -foot right-of-way. Granted for Road "C: See 1.2.2 and 1.2.5, page 6. § 4.03e. Exception from the minimum design standards for streets to allow pavement widths of 16 - feet (one-way road with no on street parking), 20 -feet (one-way road with on street parking limited to one side), 20 -feet (two-way road with no on street parking), and 24 -feet (two-way road with on street parking limited to one side). Granted. See discussion at 1.2.2, 1.2.3, 1.2.4 and 1.25 page 6. § 4.04b. Exception to allow the use of a Turning "T" layout similar to that shown within Plate No. 4. Granted. § 4.06b(3). Exception to allow the use of underground stormwater leaching/infiltration systems in place of the required leaching basins. Granted. See discussion at 1.2.10, page 6. § 4.06b(5). Exception to allow the use of gas and oil separators designed in compliance with section 4.06b(6) and the Department of Environmental Protections Stormwater Management Policy in place of the gas and oil separator specified by Appendix A, Plate 13. Granted. § 4.19. Exception to the requirement for a bicycle path within the boundaries of the project. Granted Sidewalks are being constructed within the site and a bicycle path along Scotts Way outside of the boundaries of the project. HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION The Applicant requests an exception from all requirements for the submission of plans and materials to the Nantucket Historic District Commission ("HDC"). Granted for submission of final plans only. See discussion at 1. 4, page 6 FEES AND SECURITY• GENERAL The Applicant further requests an exception from any requirement to post a bond, cash, covenant or other security in connection with the construction of the proposed infrastructure improvements. Conditionally granted. Applicant must execute a covenant that is equivalent to IForm 1 - Covenant" used by the Planning Board, see 4.8, page 1. OTHER The Applicant requests an exception from Warrant Article 56 approved at the April 2004 Town Meeting creating a new sewer district and any increased sewer connection fees as they may apply to this project Granted to the extent that sewer service may be extended to the site even though it is located outside of the so called `Town Sewer District 11 and that additional "sewer privilege charpews" ident►tled In Warrant Article 56 as §120.1 and 6 as for "owners of land entering his/her particular drain into a main drain or common sewer at the time of connection not assessable under Section 120-2" may not be assessed to affordable and middle-income units ZBA is unwilling to grant any additional relief from as yet undefined locally adopted fees or requirements contained in the Administrative Consent Order. Applicant may request additional relief once the actual privilege fees or requirements are adopted by the appropriate local authority. Exhibit B Rugged Scott LLC Application Materials, Supplemental Information, and Applicant Correspondence 1. Application package, entitled: "New Housing for Rugged Road and Scotts Way, Nantucket, Massachusetts, Comprehensive Permit Application Under M.G.L. Chapter 408, Section 20-23', submitted by Rugged Scott LLC, dated April 29, 2003. Package includes, but is not limited to: Section 1: Project Summary and Data Section 2: Applicant Status Section 3: Site Approval Letter Section 4: Development Team Section 5: Site Control and Existing Zoning Section 6: Plans and Drawings Section 7: Department of Housing and Community Development Subsidized Housing Inventory Section 8: List of Exceptions Section 9: Site Engineering and Analysis Report May 30, 2003 extension letter to Nantucket Board of Appeals from Joshua Posner 2. July 10, 2003 Technical Memorandum, from Michael R. Abend, Abend Associates, for the Applicant, regarding Traffic Impact Assessment. 3. July 28, 2003 letter to Nantucket Board of Appeals from Joshua Posner, regarding Pro Forma. 4. "Outline ZBA Presentation", dated July 31, 2003 from Joshua Posner 5. October 9, 2003 letter to Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals from Daniel C. Mulloy, PE from Cullinan Engineering, for the Applicant. 6. October 10, 2003, Technical Memorandum from Michael R. Abend, Abend Associates, for the Applicant, regarding traffic report. 7. October 10, 2003 letter to Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals from Paul R. Lelito, Executive Director of Ecological Services. 8. October 21, 2003 letter to Nantucket Board of Appeals from Joshua Posner, regarding Hard Costs, Soft Costs and Home Sales Prices. 9. November 12, 2003 letter (2 pages) to Nantucket Board of Appeals from Attorney Arthur I. Reade for the Applicant. 10. November 18, 2003 letter (3 pages) to Nantucket Board of Appeals from Joshua Posner, regarding Endangered Species Program, with attachments. 11. December 9, 2003 letter to Nantucket Board of Appeals from Joshua Posner, re: Source of Construction Estimates, Response to Marchant's Financial Model, Sales Prices, Development Costs -Fixed, not Variable Costs, Items that are particularly at risk being higher than the pro forma, A Pro Forma is a Balancing Act, A Revised Version of the Marchant Model, Where Do We Go From Here, and A Final Comment, with Attachments: #1 (2 pages,costs); #2 (2 pages (December 9, 2003 letter to Mr. Josh Posner from Edward Miano, President, Atlantic Homes, LLC); #3 (four pages, January 16, 2003 letter to Joshua Posner from Juliet Hunter, the Maury people, inc.); #4 (2 pages, "Comments on Ed Marchant's Financial Model"); #5a (2 pages); and #5b (2 pages). 12. January 23, 2004 letter (2 pages) to Nantucket Board of Appeals from Joshua Posner regarding Changes to the Plan. 13. January 29, 2004 letter (1 page) to Nantucket Board of Appeals from Daniel C. Mulloy, PE, of Cullinan Engineering, for the Applicant, regarding drainage issues. 14. Plan, Drawing No. D1528, marked as "Conceptual Plan", dated February 17, 2004, done by Weinmayr Associates, Inc., for the Applicant, a reduced copy of which is attached hereto. 15. May 19, 2004 letter (1 page) to Nantucket Board of Appeals from Attorney Arthur I. Reade, for the Applicant, and signed by Joshua Posner, granting and extension for the filing of the Decision to May 25, 2004. NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 1 EAST CHESTNUT STREET NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554 F 00.00 CASE NO. .5.1 -03 APPLICATION FOR RELIEF .s�ner's name(h): Rugged Scott LL Mailing address:,c/o Reade, Gullicksen, Hanley & Gifford, LLP Applicant's name(): Same Mailing address: .6_Young's Way. Post Office Box 2669, Nantucket, Massachusetts 02584 Incus address: 15 and 19 Rugged Road., 6 and 8 Scott's Way Assessor's Map 67 Parcels: 170, 170.1. 170.2 and 170.3 Plan Book & Page: 21-106 Lot Nos.: 19A.19B.19C and 19D Date lot acquired: June 14.2002 Deed Ref.: 761-53 Zoning District: Limited Use General -2 Uses on Lot - Commercial: None x Yes (describe) (Vacant land) Residential: Number of dwellings Duplex Apartments Rental Rooms Building Date(s): All pre -date 7/72? or C of O(s)? Building Permit Nos: Previous Zoning Board Application Nos.: State below or on a separate addendum specific relief sought (Special Permit, Variance, Appeal), Section of to Zoning By-law, and supporting details, grounds for grant of relief, listing any existing nonconformities: { This is an application for a Comprehensive Permit under Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 40B, Sections 20-23. See the attached addendum and supporting materials. I certify that the information contained herein is substantially_ complete and true to the best of my knowledge, under the pains and penalties of perjury. SIGNATURE: not owner or owner's enclose Proof of Applicant Attorney/Agent x to bring this matter before the Board) FOIR ZBAOFFICE USE Application received on:_4�0.3 By: Complete: Need copies?: Filed with Town Clerk:/ Planning Board:/ /Building Dept: G1 Bv:LJ-9 Fee deposited with Town Treasurer:/ / By: Waiver requested?: Granted: Hearing notice posted with Town Clerk:/ Mailed:/ c M:ZI�QlG�3�&/�/� Hearing(s) held on: / 0 Opened on: /, � di muA ? / / W DECISION DUE BY: Made:/ / Filed w/Town Clerk.--/—/ Mailed: —�CISION APPEALED?: / / SUPERIOR COURT: LAND COURT Form 4/03/03 New Housing for Rugged Road and Scotts Way Nantucket, Massachusetts Comprehensive Permit Application Under M.G.L. Chapter 40B, Sections 20-23 Submitted by: Rugged Scott LLC Apri129, 2003 Town of Nantucket, Massachusetts ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Premises affected: A 10 acre parcel of land running between Rugged Road and Scotts Way approximately 500 feet east of Fairgrounds Road APPLICATION FOR A COMPREHENSIVE PERMIT UNDER GENERAL LAW CHAPTER 40B, SECTIONS 20-23 Rugged Scott LLC (hereinafter the "Applicant") hereby applies to the Board of Appeals ofthe Town of Nantucket, Massachusetts, pursuant to General Laws, Chapter 40B, Section 20 through 23, as amended, for the issuance of a Comprehensive Permit authorizing the Applicant to construct 72 single-family homes units on a 10 acre parcel of land running between Rugged Road and Scotts Way, approximately 500 feet east of Fairgrounds Road Nantucket, Massachusetts. The Applicant and the development are more particularly described in the exhibits hereto annexed and submitted simultaneously herewith, all of which are incorporated herein by reference and constitute the documents required to be submitted by Sections 30.00 and 31.00 ofthe Rules and Regulations ofthe Housing Appeals Committee of the Department of Housing and Community Development. REQUEST FOR FINDINGS OF FACT The Applicant requests that the Board of Appeals make the following findings of fact in connection with the action of the Board on this application: Rugged Scott LLC, which will be a limited dividend organization within the meaning of General Laws, Chapter 40B, is eligible to receive a subsidy under a state or federal affordable housing program after a Comprehensive Permit has been granted. 2. The Applicant has shown evidence of its interest in the proposed site sufficient to qualify it as a recipient of a Comprehensive Permit for this site. 3. MassHousing (Massachusetts Housing Finance Agency), using its Housing Starts program, is an eligible subsidizing agency within the meaning of the procedural' regulations of the Housing Appeals Committee (760 CMR:30.01(C). 4. The number of low or moderate income housing units in the Town of Nantucket constitutes less then ten percent (10%) of the total housing units included in the most recently reported decennial census of the town and reported by the Department of Housing & Community Development as of October 1, 2001, as updated April 24, 2003. 5. The development as proposed in the application is consistent with local need_ s within the meaning of General Laws, Chapter 40B, Section 20. The applicant respectfully requests the Board of Appeals after complying with the procedural requirements as provided by law, to issue to the applicant a Comprehensive Permit for the development. By: Joshua Posner President New Housing at Rugged Road and Scotts Way, Nantucket APPLICATION TABLE OF CONTENTS Cover Letter by Applicant Section 1: Project Summary and Data Summary narrative description of the Applicant, the proposed development, development area and regional and community housing needs. Section 2: Applicant Status Identification of Applicant's status as a qualifying limited dividend organization.. Section 3: Site Approval Letter Site approval letter from MassHousing. Section 4: Development Team Identification of members of the development team. Section 5: Site Control and Exiling Zoning • A copy of the deed to the property in the name of Rugged Scott -) LLC. • Zoning Map for area Section 6: Plans and Drawings (see attached packet of drawingsZ • Preliminary Site Development Plans • Preliminary Landscape Plan • Preliminary Architectural Drawings Section 7: Department of Housing . & Community Development. Subsidized Housing Inventory • Current affordable housing inventory (updated April 2003) relative to Town of Nantucket Section 8: List of Exceptions A listing of all exceptions being requested from local land use regulations • Letter from Arthur I. Reade, Jr. regarding exceptions from local regulations. Section 9: Site Engineering and&gLl�n,_s Report • Site engineering narrative of existing and proposed conditions • Traffic report by Abend Associates (under separate cover) SECTION 1 PROJECT SUMMARY and DATA Applicant— Rugged pplicantRugged Scott LLC, a limited liability company (the "Applicant") is the Applicant for new housing at Rugged Road and Scotts Way and will oversee the planning, development and operating of the proposed development of 72 single family housing units at Rugged Road and Scotts Way in Nantucket, MA ("the Project"). The Applicant will develop the Project on a limited dividend basis, as required under all laws and regulations of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The current owner of the property is Rugged Scott LLC. The Applicant is owned and managed by Rising Tide Fund, LLC, the managing member of which is Rising Tide Development, LLC. The principals of Rising Tide Development are Joshua Posner and Russell Tanner, both of whom have extensive experience in the development of residential communities in Massachusetts and other parts of the Northeast. Many of these residential developments include affordable housing. Under separate cover we have provided background information on Rising Tide Development and its principals. Arthur I. Reade, Jr. is the attorney for the Applicant. The Applicant respectfully requests that all notices from. the Board in connection with this Comprehensive Permit Application be sent to Arthur I. Reade, Jr., Reade, Gullicksen, Hanley & Gifford, LLP at 6 Young's Way, PO Box 2669, Nantucket, MA 02584 Description of the Development and Affordable Housing— The preliminary development plan consists of a mix of 40 free standing single family homes and 16 two-family buildings with the appearance of single family homes arranged around a central village green and community building. The addition of a swimming pool is under consideration adjacent to the community building. The architectural styles will be a mix of traditional cottage designs on the island. Homes will have full basements and a choice of 11/z and 2 story buildings. Buyers will have a choice of various building types that will blend well together within the new community and will be in keeping with the character of other Nantucket neighborhoods and "building with Nantucket in mind." Street patterns will emphasize the quirky and irregular patterns that make Nantucket unique. Landscaping and infrastructure will be of a high quality emphasizing privet hedges and other traditional plantings, private yards and patios for each home. Lot sizes will range in size from 2500 to 7500 square feet. The smaller lots are for some zero lot -line lots for two-family units and therefore will have the same appearance as a 5000 – 7000 square foot lot. Adequate off-street parking will be provided, along with additional on -street parking for visitors and other residents. Affordable Homes at Three Price Levels— The 72 homes will be fee simple and sold in three price categories to eligible homeowners. From the exterior the homes with different price levels will be visually similar, and all price categories will be intermingled within the community. A "local preference" priority will be established for affordable unit buyers which will include those who have been living and working on Nantucket and have been priced out of the real estate market. • Low/Moderate Income. As required under Chapter 40B, 25% of the housing units (18 units) will be sold at prices in the range of $190,000 to $235,000, a level that is deemed to be affordable to households earning up to about $70,000 per year or 80% of the median income for Nantucket. • Middle Income. We propose to sell an additional 13% of the units (9 units) at prices ranging from $273,000 to $347,000 to middle income buyers earning up to about $115,000 per year or 120% of the median. Within the constraints of project economics, we are interested in maximizing the amount of housing produced in this price category because of the special difficulties faced by Nantucket people in this income grouping. • Market Rate. The remaining 63% of the homes (45 units) will be sold without restrictions. Base prices are currently projected to be in the range of $320,000 to $480,000 for a unit in a two-family building, and up to $675,000 for detached single-family homes. It is hoped that the market rate homes will also fill a need for new smaller -sized homes at the lower end of the island's price range. Nigher priced home buyers will have the option of purchasing interior finish upgrades in kitchen cabinets, countertops, appliances, flooring, bathrooms, and other features. Summary of Unit Types and Projected Sales Prices Pricing Category House Type No. Homes of Estimated Price Lower Income 40B Attached unit 2BR 2 $190 000 Attached unit, 3BR 8 $218,000 Cottage home 2BR 2 $19%000 Cottage home 3BR 4 $218,000 Cottage home 4BR 2 $235,000 Total Lower Income 18 Middle Income Attached unit,- 2BR 3 $273-000 Attached unit,3BR 3 $319,000 Cottage home 3BR 2 $3191000 -Cottage home 4BR 1 $347,000 Total Middle Income 9 Market -Rate Homes Attached unit,2BR 3 $320,000 Attached unit,3BR 13 $340 000 - $480,000 Cottage home 2BR 2 $350 000 Cotta a home 3BR 11 $470 000 -Cottage home 4BR 16 $670,000 Total Market Units 145 Total,All Units 172 (A more detailed schedule of unit types is included with the site plan documents.) Preliminary architectural drawings, prepared by Design Associates, Inc., an architectural firm located in Nantucket and Cambridge, MA, are attached hereto under separate cover. A preliminary schematic landscape plan for the entire site, as well as more detailed landscape plan for a section of the site were prepared by Weinmayr Associates of Cambridge, MA and are enclosed under separate cover. Preliminary engineering plans prepared by Cullinan Engineering, Inc. ofLakeland, MA and Blackwell & Associates ofNantucket are also attached under separate cover. An engineering narrative is included in the attachments. The Project qualifies as assisted "low or moderate income housing" within the meaning of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40B, section 20 and will provide twenty-five percent of the units (18 units) which meet the definition of low and moderate income under the statute. The Applicant desires to develop this project pursuant to the guidelines of the Housing Starts program of MassHousing, which has provided the Applicant with a site approval letter attached with this application. The units designated as low and moderate -income housing will be sold to households with incomes at or below 80 percent of median income, as established by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The currently applicable maximum incomes are $59,700 for a two-bedroom unit, $68,975 for a three-bedroom unit, and $76,950 for a four-bedroom house (based on 2003 income levels for Nantucket County). Based on a standard formula under Chapter 40B and MassHousing, the proposed sale prices for the low and moderate - income housing units is approximately $190,000 for a two-bedroom unit and $218,000 for a three-bedroom unit. The units have been priced to be affordable to families with annual incomes from about $50,000 to as high as $75,000.The affordable units are very similar to / ) market -rate units in their appearance and will be distributed throughout the proposed development. As noted above, the Applicant also proposes to include 9 Middle Income units at prices ranging from $273,000 to $347,000 for qualified buyers earning up to 120% of the area median income. These Middle Income units have been designed to be affordable to families with annual incomes from about $75,000 to as high as $115,000. Financing for the project will be provided by MassHousing, and the development will be subject to a standard regulatory agreement. and deed rider from MassHousing... Through these documents, the initial sale and subsequent resale of the affordable units is restricted to income - eligible households with sales prices remaining affordable to such households. We propose to put in place a deed restriction to the maximum length allowable, effectively in perpetuity. Site Description— The site is currently undeveloped but is adjacent to existing residential development on three sides. While the site itself is zoned at a low density, property adjacent and nearby is zoned for substantially higher densities. The site has direct access to Town waxer and sewer, provides vehicular access from three directions, will be connected to a bike path, and is on the shuttle bus route, mitigating traffic impacts. There are no wetlands on the site. Elementary, middle and high schools and the hospital are less than one mile away. The mid -island shopping area is about '/z mile away. The site is located within the designated "Town" district in the Nantucket Comprehensive Community Plan completed on 2000. The Comprehensive Plan is the result of an island -wide planning effort to identify where future development should be concentrated (the "Town" district) and where it should be limited (the "Country" district.) The ability to create affordable housing without government subsidy is tied directly to the ability to build at a greater density than is allowed by zoning. The issue of density however, is often a controversial one at the center of the 40B approval process. In order to help put the discussion of the density of our proposal in context, we have compared our proposal to the density of other high quality neighborhoods on Nantucket. As measured on the basis of buildings per acre, this proposal is comparable to Nashaquissett and Naushop, and somewhat less than Sconset and parts of Town. The proposed density is similar to levels allowed by zoning districts adjacent and nearby to the site. To the east, zoning allows one lot (with two dwellings) per 20,000 square feet or about 4 units per acre; across Fairgrounds Road just 500 feet to the west zoning allows one lot (with two dwellings) per 10,000 square fee or about 8 units per acre; 1/4 mile to the north on Fairgrounds Road zoning allows one lot per 5000 square feet (with two dwellings) or about 16 units per acre. The site itself is in a LUG -2 zoning district, which allows one lot (with two dwellings) per 80,000 square feet. Local Need for Affordable Housing— In communities where less than ten percent of the housing is affordable (as described above), the Zoning Board of Appeals must operate under the presumption that there is a substantial regional need for affordable housing that outweighs local concerns. Accordingly, the Board may only deny the proposal or impose significant conditions if it finds that the Project will - significantly imperil the health and safety of the occupants or of town residents, or will significantly endanger the environment according to state environmental standards. According to figures compiled by the Massachusetts Department ofHousing and Community Development (DHCD), on October 1, 2001, Nantucket's subsidized housing inventory consisted of 100 units, representing 2.48% of its total housing stock of 4040. Thus is below the 10% threshold requirements established in 1969 under Chapter 774 of the Acts of 1969. An additional 310 subsidized housing units are required for Nantucket to meet the 10% threshold. Exceptions and Approvals Requested— The Applicant requests a waiver from those local laws, ordinances, by-laws and regulations that would otherwise apply to the Project and are more restrictive than applicable state requirements. A more detailed list of anticipated exceptions is listed in Section 8 of this application. Conclusion— For all of the foregoing reasons, and for the additional reasons the Applicant will present at the scheduled public hearing on this Application, the Applicant respectfully requests the Board, after complying with the procedural requirements as provided by law, to issue to the Applicant a Comprehensive Permit for the Development. By: Joshua Posner President SECTION 2 APPLICANT STATUS Rugged Scott LLC agrees to conform to the limited dividend requirements of Chapter 40B which, in turn, requires that the developer abide by the regulatory requirements imposed by the lending agency for the project. This project is proposed under the Housing Starts program of MassHousing, the Commonwealth's primary agency for funding affordable housing. Rugged Scott LLC will enter into a standard Regulatory Agreement with MassHousing, and all affordable units will be subject to a standard Deed Rider provided by MassHousing. The Regulatory Agreement and specimen Deed Rider will be finalized prior to the commencement of construction. The Regulatory Agreement stipulates that the developer's profit shall be limited to 20% (defined as net revenues from all housing sales no greater than 20'3/o above total development costs). The profit margin will be analyzed by the Monitoring Agent for the lender upon receipt of all sales revenues and project expense information. A copy of this analysis will be filed with the Town of Nantucket upon completion of the report. Any profits in excess of the 20% limit will be forwarded to the Town for use in further assisting affordable housing within the community. SECTION 3 SITE APPROVAL LETTER )Or MASSIH41ousift Massachusetts Housing Finance Agency One Beacon Street, Boston, MA 02108 TEL:617.854.1O00I FAX:617.854.1029 TDD:617.864.1O25 www.mosshousing.com April 11, 2003 Joshua Posner, President Riding Tide Development LLC 32 Arlington Street Cambridge, MA 02140 Re: Rugged Road, Nantucket PE -104 Project Eligibility (Site Approval) Application Dear I&. Posner: This letter is in response to your application for a determination of Project Eligibility (Site Approval) pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40D and 760 CMR 30-31 (the "Comprehensive Permit Rules") under the Housing Starts Program (the "Program") of the Massachusetts Housing Finance Agency ("MassHousing'). The proposal is to build 36 single family homes and 18 duplex homes (the "Project') on approximately 10 acres of land on Rugged Road, Nantucket (the "Site,). The land is currently undeveloped and located in a residential neighborhood. This letter is intended to be a written determination of Project Eligibility (Site Approval) in accordance with the Comprehensive Permit Rules, establishing fundability by a subsidizing agency under a low and moderate -income housing subsidy program. MassHousing staff has performed an on-site inspection of the Site and reviewed the - pertinent information submitted by the applicant for the Project in accordance with the Comprehensive• Permit Rules. As a result of our review, we have made the following findings: (1) the proposed housing design is generally appropriate for the Site; (2) the proposed Project appears financially feasible within the housing market in which it will be situated based on comparable sales figures; (3) an initial pro forma has been reviewed and the Project appears fin ancially'feasible on the basis of estimated development costs; and (4) the developer meets the general eligibility standards of the Program. In addition, it appears that the applicant will be eligible to form an entity or use an existing entity to act as a limited dividend organization in connection with an application for MassHousing financing and a Comprehensive Permit under the Program. W" nnm,iw r.,,,..- I Ari, k,..i i n:...,.,. rk .j_. I n,,....,. 0 ri..,..,., c,..r,.:,,. n;-#- Page 2 Rugged Road, Nantucket PE -104 Staff has also determined that the Project appears generally eligible under the requirements of the Program, subject to final review of eligibility and to final approval. These requirements include the following: 1. The developer must offer a minimum of 25% of the units as affordably priced housing units enabling families with a gross annual income of 80% of the area median income to qualify to purchase the unit under generally accepted mortgage loan underwriting standards. The most recent income limits as published by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) indicate that 80% of the current median family income for Nantucket is $46,880. 2. The affordable units will be governed by a Deed Rider ensuring the units remain affordable to future buyers, for a minimum of 30 years. 3. The developer must be a limited dividend organization and agree to limit the profit on the development to not more than 20% of the project's total development costs. 4. The developer must enter into a Regulatory Agreement with M=Housing and the Town of Nantucket stating specific requirements that must be met to comply with the Comprehensive Permit Rules. 5. The developer must comply with MassHousing's Acquisition Value Policy, which is attached as Exhibit "A". The following issues should be addressed and fully explored in the public hearing process: I. Whether or not the development will comply with all statutory and regulatory restrictions and conditions relating to protection of drainage, wetlands, vernal pools and wildlife habitats and nearby conservation areas, if applicable to this Site, except to the extent waived by the municipality. 2. Whether or not the development will comply with Title V regulations regarding the design and construction of individual wells, septic systems and wastewater treatment plants if applicable to this Site, except to the extent waived pursuant to Title V. This approval is expressly limited to the development of no more than 72 homeownership units under the Program, with not less than 18 of such units designated as affordable homeownership units for low and moderate income persons or families under the terms of the Program. It is not a commitment or guarantee of MassHousing's financing and does not constitute a site plan or building design approval. Should you consider the construction of additional units, you will be required to submit a new Project Eligibility (Site Approval) application for review by MassHousing. Page 3 Rugged Road, Nantucket PE -144 This approval will be effective for a period of two years from the date of this letter. Should construction not commence within this period or should the effective period of this letter not be extended in writing by MassHousing, it shall be considered to have expired and no longer be in effect. In addition, we are requiring that MassHousing be notified at the following times throughout this two year period: (1) when the applicant applies to the local ZBA for a comprehensive permit, (2) when the ZBA issues a decision, and if applicable, (3) when any appeals are filed. If you have any questions concerning this letter, please contact Richard Herlihy at 617-854-1335. Sincerely, Thomas R. Gleason Executive Director CC: Ms. Jane Wallis Gumble, Director, DHCD Francis T. Spriggs, Chairman- Nantucket Board of Selectmen Page 4 Rugged Road, Nantucket PE -104 Exhibit "A" Acauisition Value Policy The maximum permissible acquisition value which can be included in the Development Budget for a Construction Loan application will be limited to the lesser of a. the "as is" appraised market value of the land and improvements, as estimated "by the MassHousing Home Ownership Department at the time of loan commitment, and subject to confirmation by an MassHousing-commissioned independent appraisal prior to loan closing or b. the purchase price of the land and improvements in the last arm's length transaction, if any, within the last three years, plus (i) reasonable and verifiable costs of property improvements made subsequent to the above acquisition and/or (ii) reasonable and verifiable carrying costs related to the land and improvements, such as interest, taxes and insurance. Special Restrictions for Comprehensive Permit Developments In addition to the above -noted acquisition policy, developments which have received a comprehensive permit will be subject to the following restriction: i } Economic benefits of the comprehensive permit shall accrue to the development and shall not be used to substantiate an acquisition cost that is unreasonably greater than the current appraised fair market value under existing zoning without a comprehensive permit in place. This reslricaon will be applied regardless of ownership transfers which might take place during the development process. MEWU SECTION 4 DEVELOPMENT TEAM New Housing at Rugged Road and Scotts Way, Nantucket Development Team Applicant: Rugged Scott, LLC 32 Arlington Street Cambridge, MA 02140 Attn: Joshua Posner Tel. 617-549-3232 Fax. 617-492-1143 Developer Rising Tide Development, LLC 32 Arlington Street Cambridge, MA 02140 Joshua Posner, President Tel. 617-549-3232 Fax. 617-492-1143 Russell Tanner, Development Manager Tel/Fax: 791-255-1251 Property Owner Rugged Scott, LLC 32 Arlington Street Cambridge, MA 02140 Attn: Joshua Posner Tel. 617-549-3232 Fax. 617-492-1143 Attorney Arthur I Reade, Jr. Reade, Gullicksen, Hanley & Gifford, LLP 6 Young's Way PO Box 2669 Nantucket, MA 02584 Tel. 508-228-3128; Fax. 508-228-5630 _ Architect Design Associates PO Box 1520 Nantucket, MA 02554 432 Columbia Street Cambridge, MA 02141 Christopher L. Dallmus, Principal Tel. 617-661-9082 Fax. 617-661-2550 Landscape Architect Weinmayr Associates 7 South Street Somerville, Ma 02143 Michael Weinmayer, Principal Tel. 617-354-8700; Fax. 617-492-2725 Civil Engineering Cullinan Engineering, Inc. 10 Riverside Drive, Suite 104 Lakeville, MA 02347 Tel, 508-946-9911; Fax. 508-946-9955 Dan Mulloy, Principal Blackwell & Associates 20 Teasdale Circle Nantucket, MA 02554 Tel: 508-228-9026 Leo. Asadoorian, Principal Traffic Consultant Abend Associates 265 Winn St. Burlington, MA 01803 Michael Abend, President Tel. (781) 273-5383; Fax (781) 273-3053 SECTION 5 SITE CONTROL AND ZONING • Deed Attached • Zoning Map Attached BOOK 761*PAGE0053 MASSACHUSETTS QUITCLAIM DEED I, Steven C. Jamison aka Stephen C. Jemison, -of 700 Forest Street.. Denver, Colorado 80220 for consideration paid in the amount of $1,650,000.00 BRANT to Rugged Scott LLC, a Delaware limited liability company,, clo Rising Tide Development, LLC, 32 Arlington Street, Carnbridge, MA 02140 with QUITCLAIM COVENANTS, those parcels of vacant land situated in the Town and County of Nantucket, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, now known and numbered as JS Rugged Road, 18 Rugged Road, 8 Scotts Way, and 6 Scotts Way, bounded. and. described as follows:. PARCEL 1: 15 Rugged Road (Map 67/Parce1170) NORTHEASTERLY by a private way aka Rugged Road, two hundred sixty-two and 92/100 (262.92) feet, SOUTHEASTERLY by Lot 19B in accordance with a plan hereinafter mentioned, four hundred twenty and 14/100 (420.14) feet; SOUTHWESTERLY by Lot 191) on said plan, two hundred sixty-two and 38/100 (262.38) feet; and . NORTHWESTERLY by lands now or formerly owned by Marion M. Biggs, four hundred twenty-one and 74/100 (421.74) feet. Being shown as Lot 19A on plan of land entitled `Definitive Subdivision' Plan of Land in Nantucket, MA. Scale 1' = 50', Dated May 26, 1981, Surveyor. Michael S. Bachman, R.L.S.; Engineer: Robert L Leichter. P.E.; Owners: William D. Jemison, et aL Said plan recorded at 'Nantucket County Registry o1 Deeds at Book 21, Page 106: For title, see Deed recorded in the Nantucket Registry of Deeds at Book 191, Page 287. PARCEL 2: 19 Rugged Road (Map 67/13arce1170.1) NORTHEASTERLY by a private way aka Rugged Road, two hundred sixty-two and 93/100 (262.93) feet; SOUTHEASTERLY by land now or formerly of Mary Mikolajck, four hundred eighteen and 54/100 {418.54) feet; SOUTHWESTERLY by Lot 19C on plan hereinafter mentioned, two hundred sixty-two and 38/100 (282.38) feet; .and NORTHWESTERLY by Lot 19A on said plan, four hundred twenty and '� 14/100 (420.14) feet. BOOK 7.6IPAoEO054 Being shown as Lot 19B on plan of land entitled "DefinkWe Subdivision Plan of Land in Nantucket, L Mass! drawn by Michael S. Bachman, R.L.S., dated May 26.1981, and revised August 27,1981, recorded at the Nantucket Registry of Deeds in Plan Book 21, Page 106. For title, see Deed recorded at Book 393, Page 142. PARCEL 3: 8 Scotts Way (Map 67/Parcel 170.2) NORTHEASTERLY by Lot 19B in accordance with a plan hereinafter mentioned, two hundred sbdy two and 381100 (262.38) feet; SOUTHEASTERLY by lands now or formerly owned by Judy Thompson, Trustee and Chester T: Scott, et wfour hundred eighteen and 53/100 (418.53) feet; SOUTHWESTERLY by a private way aka Scotts Way, two hundred sixty-one and 85/100 (261.85) feet; and NORTHWESTERLY by Lot 19D on said plan, four hundred twenty and 14/100 (420.14) feet. Being shown as Lot 19C on plan of land entitled "Definitive Subdivision" Pian of Land in Nantucket, MA. Sole 't" = 60', *Dated May 26, 1981, Surveyor. Michael S. Bachman, R.L.S.; Engineer .Robert L. Leichter, P.E.; Owners: 'William D. Jemison, et al. Said plan recorded at Nantucket County. Registry of L Deeds. at Book 21, Page 106. For title, see Deed recorded in the Nantucket Registry of Deeds at Book 191, Page 287. PARCEL 4: 6 Scotts Way (Map 67/Parcel 170.3) NORTHEASTERLY by Lot 19A in accordance with a plan hereinafter mentioned; two hundred sixty-two and 381100 (262.38) feet; SOUTHEASTERLY by Lot 19C on said plan, four hundred twenty and 141100 (420.14) feet; SOUTHWESTERLY by a private way, two hundred s'ixty-one and 85/100 (261.85) feet; and -: NORTHWESTERLY by lands now or formerly owned by Marion M. Biggs, four hundred twenty-one and 74/100 (421.74) feet. Being shown as Lot 19D on plan of land entitled "Definitive Subdivision" Plan of Land in NantuckO MA. Scale 1" = 50', Dated .May 26, 1981, Surveyor Michael S. Bachman, R.L.S.; Engineer. Robert I Leichter, P.E.; Owners: William D: Jemison, et al. Said plan recorded at Nantucket County Registry Deeds at Book 21, Page 106. For title, see Deed recorded in the Nantucket Registry of Deeds at Book 465, Page 227. 0 M r BOOK .7 61 PAGE 0055 WITNESS W HAND AND SEAL, this day of June, 2 ven .C. mon STATE OF County of as June, 2002 .Then personally appeared the above-named Steven C. Jemison and acknowledged .the foregoing instrument to -be his free act and deed, before.me, w otary i?uialiC S[n My Commission Expires: WAN7UCfCE7 ao%& . 9Pa1d S GrO a$w WE et Cour�Z1. ived & EnW�ed�� pat�9"Ou"ime: ,1, 00 MY HMTj-M j<e t' "'JES aEE 16 `_" BVIVD2 ii:ifi M COM 43220 . FEF $7524.00 CA" *7524.00 Tnatn."wn...t SECTION 6 PLANS & DRAWINGS (materials provided under separate cover) Preliminary Landscape Plan - Weinmayr Associates Preliminary Architectural Drawings- Design Associates • Unit Plans, typical for each building type • Building Elevations, Typical Preliminary Site Development Plans — Cullinan Engineering and Blackwells & Associates • Cover including contextual site plan showing surrounding area • Existing Conditions Plan • Overall Layout Plan • Preliminary Subdivision Plan • Grading and Utilities Plan •. Typical Site Details Pq • r v 4t SECTION 7 SUBSIDIZED HOUSING INVENTORY SECTION 7 SUBSIDIZED HOUSING INVENTORY According to figures compiled by the Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD), on October 1, 2001, as updated April 24, 2003, Nantucket's subsidized housing inventory consisted of 100 units, representing 2.48% of its total 2000 housing stock of 4040. This is below the 10% threshold requirements established in 1969 under Chapter 774 of the Acts of 1969. An additional 310 subsidized housing units are required to meet the 10% threshold. SECTION 8 LIST OF EXCEPTIONS TO THE ZONING ORDINANCES AND OTHER LOCAL LAND USE REQUIREMENTS Please see attached memorandum from Arthur I. Reade, Jr. concerning exceptions to local by-laws and regulations. READE, GULLICKSEN, HANLEY & GIFFOR% LLP SIX YOUNG'S WAY NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554 ARTHUR L READE, JR., P.C. KENNETH A. GULLICKSEN (508) 228-3128 MAU ING ADDRESS MARIANNE HANLEY FAX: (508) 228-5630 POST OFFICE BOX 2669 WHITNEY A GiIFFORD NANTUCKET, MASS. 02594 May 16, 2003 Nantucket Board of Appeals 1 East Chestnut Street Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Re: Rugged Scott, LLC Comprehensive Permit Application Dear Board Members: This letter will serve as a memorandum as to the provisions of the Nantucket Code and other local regulations as to which exceptions are requested in -connection with the above application. This memorandum is subject to augmentation in the event that further exceptions are determined to be necessary during the hearing process before the Board of Appeals ("ZBA"). The exceptions requested, and in certain instances an explanation of the reason for exceptions, are as follows: NANTUCKET CODE Chapter 127, Streets and Sidewalks § 127-1. Exception from the requirement for a permit for excavation or alteration of a public way, sidewalk or bicycle path from the Nantucket Department of Public Works and the Board of Selectmen. The requirement to apply for additional permits from other Town agencies and officials would create an unnecessary duplication of work by the applicant, contrary to the purpose of the Comprehensive Permit process. The Department of Public Works will have the opportunity to review the project and submit comments to the ZBA for review during the hearing process. Chapter 139, Zoning § 139-7.A. Exception to permit a clubhouse/community building, which may also contain a retail shop, within a Limited Use General -2 ("LUG -2") zoning district. A clubhouse/community building for use by the residents READE, GULLICKSEN, HANLEY & GIFFORD, LLP Nantucket Board of Appeals May 16, 2003 Page 2 of the proposed development and their invitees is proposed. The clubhouse is expected to include a swimming pool. A small shop selling sundries such as coffee, newspapers, basic grocery items, ice cream and other similar items marketed primarily to the residents of the development may be included in the clubhouse building. These do not constitute permitted uses within the LUG -2 zoning district in which the site is located. § 139-12.B(3)(a). Exception from the requirement that the application be referred to the Nantucket Water Commission. The recommendations of the Wannacomet Water Company should be made through the Comprehensive Permit process before the ZBA. § 139-16.A. Exception from the intensity regulations as to lot area, frontage, setbacks and ground cover ratio. In the LUG -2 zoning district, minimum lot area is 80,000 square feet; minimum frontage is 150 feet; minimum front yard setback is 35 feet; minimum side and rear yard setback is 15 feet; and maximum ground cover ratio is 41. The proposed project will have lots ranging from about 2,112 square feet to about 11,353 square feet with the average lot area being about 4,898 square feet. The exception from setback requirements is necessary to allow flexibility in siting of the proposed buildings and to allow the use of attached fee simple town house dwellings with zero side yard setbacks. The ground cover ratio is planned to average about 24$, with some lots .having a ratio as high as 450. This is necessary because of the smaller lot sizes. § 139-16.D. Exception from the regularity formula. This is necessary to allow for flexibility in designing lot shapes. § 139-18. Exception from on-site parking requirements for the lot which will contain the proposed clubhouse. Use of the clubhouse will be primarily by the residents of the development and their invitees, all of whom will be within easy walking distance. A limited number of on-site parking spaces and several on -street parking spaces will be provided near this facility. REA.DE, GULLICKSEN, HANLEY & GIFFORD, LLP Nantucket Board of Appeals May 16, 2003 Page 3 § 139-20. Exception from the provision of off-street loading facilities for the lot which will contain the proposed clubhouse. There will be adequate on -street areas which can provide for loading. § 139-20.1. Exception from the regulations as to driveway access. The Nantucket Department of Public Works can review and comment upon driveway access, and make recommendations to the ZBA as part of the Comprehensive Permit process. The requirement to apply for additional permits would create an unnecessary duplication of work on behalf of the applicant. § 139-23. Exception from the Site Plan Review provisions for the proposed clubhouse. The ZBA will be reviewing the entire project and separate site plan review for the clubhouse building in not necessary. § 139-24.A. Exception from the Phased Development provisions. Limiting the rate at which the project ' 1 could be developed would place an undue hardship upon the applicant and thus increase the costs and impair the feasibility of an affordable housing project. § 139.26.C. Exception from the requirements under clause (1) for submission of a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Historic District Commission and under clause (2)(b) for submission of a sewer connection permit from the Department of Public Works in connection with a building permit application. § 139-28.A(3) and B(2). Exception from the requirement for certifications from the Historic District Commission before obtaining an occupancy permit. RULES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE SUBDIVISION OF LAND ISSUED BY THE NANTUCKET PLANNING BOARD § 2.06b(18). Exception to the required on-site disposal area. The size of the proposed project and the property does not provide enough area for any on- site disposal. § 4.03a(1). Exception from the street width standards to allow pavement widths for the various proposed subdivision roadways of 16 feet (one-way road with no READE, GULLICKSEN, HANLEY & GIFFORD, LLP Nantucket Hoard of Appeals May 16, 2003 Page 4 on street parking), 20 -feet (one-way road with on street parking limited to one side), 20 -feet (two-way road with no on street parking), and 24 -feet (two-way road with on street parking limited to one side). The use of differing pavement widths will allow greater flexibility in the project layout as well as creating greater control of on-site traffic flow. § 4.03e. Exception from the minimum design standards for streets to allow the -use of a 30 -foot right-of-way ("R.O.W.") in place of the required 40 -foot right-of- way. A 30 -foot R.O.W. would be utilized in only one location for the construction of a one way road. A 40 - foot R.O.W. is not needed due to the smaller pavement width for a one way road. § 4.03e. Exception from the minimum design standards for streets to allow pavement widths of 16 -feet (one- way road with no on street parking), 20 -feet (one-way road with on street parking limited to one side), 20 - feet (two-way road with no on street parking), and 24 - feet (two-way road with on street parking limited to one side) . The use of differing pavement widths will allow greater flexibility in the project layout as well as creating greater control of on-site traffic patterns. § 4.04b. Exception to allow the use of a Turning "T" layout similar to that shown within Plate No. 4. The proposed "T" layout may exceed the 52 -foot maximum R.O.W. width at the end of the "T" layout in order to provide better access to lots. § 4.06b(3). Exception to allow the use of underground stormwater leaching/infiltration systems in place of the required leaching basins. Use of this type of system will reduce the amount of disturbance to the site during construction and will reduce the amount of required infrastructure. § 4.06b(5). Exception to allow the use of gas and oil separators designed in compliance with section 4.06b(6) and the Department of Environmental Protections Stormwater Management Policy in place of the gas and oil separator specified by Appendix A, Plate 13. Designing the gas and oil separators in compliance with READE, GULLICKSEN, HANLEY & GIFFORD, LLP Nantucket Board of Appeals May 16, 2003 Page 5 these more recent policies will provide a higher level of treatment and protection of groundwater resources. § 4.19. Exception to the requirement for a bicycle path within the boundaries of the project. The project proponent is proposing to construct an 8 -foot bicycle path parallel to Scott's Way that would begin at the proposed Fairgrounds Road bicycle path and extend to the project site. The proponent will also be constructing 4 -foot sidewalks within the project that will connect to the proposed Scott's Way bicycle path and provide access to the Rugged Road bicycle path. Therefore, the project will have access to the proposed bicycle path along Scott's Way and the existing bicycle path on Rugged Road. HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION The applicant requests an exception from all (; requirements for the submission of plans and materials to the Nantucket Historic District Commission ("HDC"). The HDC will be able to comment and make recommendations in connection with the Comprehensive Permit process before the ZBA. The submission of plans to the HDC and obtaining -of approvals for all structures would be unduly burdensome to the applicant. FEES AND SECURITY; GENERAL The applicant requests an exception from the requirements for all local fees relating to the affordable housing units in this project, including but not limited to fees for building permits, sewer connection permits, and. water connection permits. The applicant further requests an exception from any requirement to post a bond, cash, covenant or other security in connection with the construction of the proposed infrastructure improvements. The applicant further requests exceptions from the applicability of such other provisions of local by-laws and regulations as would otherwise be applicable to the project. READE, GULLICKSEN, HANLEY & GIFFORD, LLP Nantucket Board of Appeals May 16, 2003 Page 6 READE, GULLICKSEN, HANLEY & GIFFORD, LLP By• Arthur I. Reade, Jr., P.C. air@readelaw.com AIR/iry SECTION 9 SITE ENGINEERING NARRATIVE A narrative summary prepared by Cullinan Engineering of the existing conditions and proposed development is attached. TRAFFIC REPORT A traffic analysis of the proposed development has been prepared by Abend Associates and will be submitted under separate cover. SITE ANALYSIS REPORT COMPREHENSIVE PERMIT APPLICATION RUGGED ROAD & SCOTTS WAY NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS April 30, 2003 Prepared for Owner & Applicant: RUGGED SCOTT, LLC. c/o RISING TIDE DEVELOPMENT, LLC. 32 ARLINGTON STREET CAMBRIDGE, MA 02140 Prepared by: CULLINAN ENGINEERING CO., INC. 10 RIVERSIDE DRIVE LAKEVILLE, MA 02347 508-946-9911 Job Number: 2023127 TABLE OF CONTENTS L INTRODUCTION APPENDICES Drainage Analysis Data a. Street Network Plan b. USGS Locus Map IL SURROUNDING LAND USES III. EXISTING & PROPOSED STRUCTURES IV. SURFACE WATER RESOURCES V. GROUND WATER RESOURCES VI. DRAINAGE SYSTEM VII. FLOOD HAZARD VIII. VEGETATIVE COVER TX. TRAFFIC SAFETY & CONVENIENCE X. DEVELOPMENT PHASING XL COMMON OPEN SPACES XII. PROJECT SUMMARY APPENDICES Drainage Analysis Data L INTRODUCTION This report has been prepared for the proposed Rugged Road and Scotts Way Comprehensive Permit (40B) Application by Rugged Scotts LLC. The proposed project consists of a mixed density housing development consisting of 73 building lots, upon which will be constructed 72 single family homes and 1 clubhouse. Thirty-two (32) of the residential housing units will be constructed in two family buildings with a zero -lot fire wall separation between each unit. In this way the development will have the appearance of 56 residential buildings (40 stand-alone single family cottages, and 16 two- family buildings that will look like single family homes) and one clubhouse. The proposed project is located on the island of and in the Town of Nantucket, Massachusetts. The site is bounded to the north by Rugged Road, abutted to`the east by limited residential ,development, bounded to the south by Scotts Way, and to the west by residential development and eventually Fairground Road. The site is shown on the Town of Nantucket Assessors map 67 as lots 170, 170.1, 170.2, and 170.3. The purpose of this report is to document existing and proposed site conditions consistent with the Nantucket Planning Boards Site Analysis Report requirements. This report is to be used as part of the submission requirements to the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) for approval of the Comprehensive Permit Application. EL SURROUNDING LAND USES The site and all abutting properties are zoned for residential use. There is an existing residential subdivision to the north of the site (Seikinnow Way) originating from Rugged } Road containing approximately 18 lots. Abutting properties are partially developed with residential dwellings to the east and west of the site. There are 15 abutters to the site both direct and those located across roadways. The site is currently zoned Limited Use General (LUG -2). Current zoning requires a minimum lot size of 80,000 square feet and allows for a primary and a secondary dwelling on each lot. Adjacent and nearby parcels are also zoned for residential use with minimum required lot sizes ranging from 5000 to 20,000 -square feet. The proposed development would create 73 building lots with an average lot size of 4,898 square feet. III. EXISTING & PROPOSED STRUCTURES There are no known existing or previously demolished structures located on the site. The proposed development will contain 72 homes and one club house contained in 57 structures as tabulated below. The residential dwellings will vary in size and style in order to appeal to a wide range of potential owners and affordability. The buildings will consist of 40 single family structures, 16 two-family structures with the appearance of a single family home, and one clubhouse%ommunity building. A minimum of twenty-five (251/o) percent of the units will be designated as affordable as required for a Comprehensive Permit. SCHEDULE OF BUILDING UNITS Housing 'Type # of # of Housing Buildings Units Bedrooms per Unit Total # of Bedrooms Cottage A 19 19 4 76 Cottage B 14 14 3 42 Cottage 4 4 2 8 Barn D 3 3 3 9 Two Family A 8 16 3 48 Two FamilyB 8 16 8-3BRs 8-2BRs 40 Clubhouse 1 - - - Totaal 57 72 - 223 IV. SURFACE WATER RESOURCES The site does not contain or abut any known surface water resource areas. All proposed building lots would be connected to the municipal sewage treatment system. Connecting to the municipal sewage treatment system will negate adverse impacts to surface water resources. V. GROUND WATER RESOURCES The site is located within the Public Wellhead Recharge District as indicated on the Nantucket Water Resources Protection Plan. Drinking water for the proposed project would be provided from the Wannacomet Water Company via connection to an existing water line within Rugged Road. The development will include the construction of water lines within the site. A waterline extension from Fairgrounds Road via. Scotts Way connecting with the site's water network is also proposed, thus establishing a looped system within Fairgrounds Road, Scotts Way and Rugged Road All proposed building lots would be provided with connections to the municipal sewer system. The receiving sewer collection system within Rugged Road has sufficient capacity to accommodate the additional flow from this project. The capacity of the municipal wastewater treatment €acility is currently under review by the Nantucket Department of Public Works and the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (DEP). Connecting to the municipal sewer system will negate adverse impacts to ground water resources. The proponent will be submitting to the Nantucket Department of Public Works and the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) for a sewer extension permit for the construction of the proposed sewer infrastructure upon receipt of a Comprehensive Permit from the Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals. Stormwater runoff will be treated through the use of stormwater management Best Management Practices (BMP's). The anticipated BMP's to be used within the proposed drainage system include deep sump hooded catch basins, oil and water separators, and underground infiltration systems. The proposed infiltration system will recharge all runoff from the proposed subdivision thereby ensuring that pre -development stormwater runoff and recharge rates are met. 2 VI. DRAINAGE SYSTEM The drainage system will be designed in compliance with the Nantucket Planning Board Regulations; and importantly, the projected existing peak stormwater runoff rate will not be exceeded upon completion of the proposed development. The proposed drainage system will be designed to store and infiltrate the entire stormwater runoff volume occurring from a 25 year 24-hour storm event. Catch basins along the proposed roadway will collect runoff entering the roadway system. The drainage network will then route the entire collected runoff into the underground storage and infiltration system where it will be retained for infiltration. Therefore, the post - development conditions will result in a net decrease of surface runoff leaving the property. See appendix for preliminary drainage analysis. Methodology The proposed drainage system will be designed according to the requirements of the Nantucket Planning Board Regulations. The following policies and design aides will also be referred to for the design of the proposed drainage improvements: • Department of Environmental Protection Stormwater Management Policy • Artificial Recharge: Evaluation and Guidance to Municipalities: A Guide to Stormwater Infiltration Practice in Public Water Supply Areas of Massachusetts, as prepared by the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission. VII. FLOOD HAZARD The site is not located within any known flood hazard areas as shown on the flood insurance rate map for the Town of Nantucket. Please refer to the following Flood Insurance Rate Map for further information: Town of Nantucket, Massachusetts, Nantucket County, community panel number 250230 0012D, as revised November 6, 1996. VIII. VEGETATIVE COVER The site is very densely wooded with scrub oak and pitch pine. Development of the site will require the removing almost all interior vegetation. Portions of existing vegetation along the perimeter of the site will be maintained as a natural buffer to the maximum possible. Upon completion of the site infrastructure improvements the proponent intends to fully landscape all disturbed areas. Shade trees will be planted along the proposed roadways as required by the Subdivision Regulations. Public scenic and view easement will not be provided as there are no substantial unique natural features or views provided from within this property. IX. TRAFFIC SAFETY & CONVENIENCE The site will be accessed by Rugged Road and Scotts Way. Part of the site access will consist of the reconstruction of approximately 860 -feet of Scotts Way. Scotts Way will be reconstructed from a dirt road to a 20 -foot paved road with an 8 -foot bike path. The proposed lots will be accessed by the construction of approximately 2,200 -feet of new on site roadway. On site traffic circulation will be provided by 5 new roadways, indicated by A through E on the site plans, totaling approximately 2,200 -feet. Road A, approximately 915 -feet long, is paved to 24 -feet and provides two-way circulation traversing through the site and linking Rugged Road with Scotts Way. Road B, approximately 645 -feet long, is paved to 20 -feet and provides one-way traffic circulation diverging from Road A and terminating at Rugged Road. Road C, approximately 220 -feet long, consists of a 16 -foot wide crushed shell surface and is a one-way roadway joining Road B to Road A at the northerly side of the site. Roads D and E are paved to 20 -feet and end with a "r' turnaround. - Sidewalks will be provided on a minimum of one side of roads A and B to aid in We pedestrian movement throughout the site. Sidewalks will be a minimum width of 4 -feet and will be designed and constructed in compliance with the requirements of the Massachusetts Architectural Access Board (521 CMR). A bice path is proposed as part of the reconstructed segment of Scotts Way. The sidewalks will provide easy access to the adjacent bicycle paths along Rugged Road and Scotts Way. Shared driveways, surfaced with crushed shells, are proposed to access rear lots and also provide parking. A minimum of two parking spaces have been provided for each unit. Guest and overflow parking will be available one side only on Roads A and B. Please refer to a separate traffic impact study report for detailed information regarding traffic related impacts. X. DEVELOPMENT PHASING The proponent anticipates construction of the roadway system and associated utilities to begin in the spring of 2004. However, the proponent reserves the right to alter this time frame as necessary. In order to facilitate the construction of affordable housing the proponent will be requesting an exception from any required phased construction and development requirements. The anticipated construction completion daze for the project has not been determined and will be a function of the demand. X1. COMMON OPEN SPACES The project will provide limited open space areas along the borders of the site as well as within an interior parcel of land that will contain a common area, clubhouse, and swimming pool. Use of the clubhouse and swimming pool will be restricted to residents and their invitees. The clubhouse and pool are proposed in the center of the project to provide recreational activities for residents. A small shop selling sundries such as coffee, newspapers, basic grocery items, ice cream, and other miscellaneous items marketed primarily to the residents of the development may be included in the clubhouset community building. The addition of such a shop within the development is a community enhancing amenity and will aid in reducing the amount of traffic generated from residents of the development. 4 XII. PROJECT SUMMARY The project design incorporates. measures to reduce its impact on the Town of Nantucket and the environment. This report identifies the applicable areas set forth within the Planning Board Regulations as they apply to this site. Existing vegetation along the borders of the site will be maintained to the maximum extent practicable in order to provide a natural buffer to abutting properties. Scotts Way will be reconstructed to a paved roadway with a bicycle path. Substantial drainage improvements are proposed within the site and Scotts Way to aid in recharging the groundwater aquifer and to protect it from pollutants. The internal roadway system is designed to provide for safe and convenient traffic operations through the use of common shared drives, limited on -street parking, and handicap accessible sidewalks. A clubhouse and pool is proposed in the center of the project to provide recreational activities for homeowners association members and their invitees. The subject areas discussed in this report were referred to during the preliminary design of the project. The project would create much needed affordable housing thereby benefiting current and firture residents, and the community. DRAINAGE ANALYSIS DATA Methodology The proposed drainage system will be designed according to the requirements of the Nantucket Planning Board Regulations. The following policies and design aides will also be referred to for the design of the proposed .drainage improvements: • Department of Environmental Protection Stormwater Management Policy • Artificial Recharge: Evaluation and Guidance to Municipalities: A Guide to Stormwater Infiltration Practice m Public Water Supply Areas of Massachusetts, as prepared by the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission. The drainage system for this project will be designed using the following methods: the HydroCad® Stormwater Modeling System, the Barnstable Method, and Manning's Equation. The HydroCad® Stormwater Modeling System will be used to quantify stormwater runoff for pre and post -development conditions. The HydroC.ad® program utilizes Natural Resource Conservation Service (MRCS) techniques (TR -20) to predict stormwater runoff for given design storms. The calculations performed by HydroCad® are based on the NRCS model return frequency Type III distribution and a 25 year design storm. The Barnstable Drainage Method will be utilized to determine an acceptable soil infiltration rate based on soil types and percolation test results. The National Resource Conservation Service (MRCS) Soil Survey for Nantucket County lists the site as Evesboro sand (EvA), which is soil drainage class type A. This type of soil is very well suited for the use of infiltration systems. Manning's Equation will be used to determine the required pipe sizes within the collection system. Storage di Infiltration System (SIS) HydroCad® was utilized to model the subcatchment contributing stormwater to the storage and infiltration system (SIS). The subcatcLment is routed to a HydroCae pond model that simulates the SIS. The SIS consists of 1-1/2" crushed stones with 40% assumed void space and corrugated polyethylene perforated drainage pipes. A stage discharge curve is created for the SIS based on the infiltration rate taken from the Barnstable Method. After entering the required data the model is complete and the program is executed to determine if the size of the SIS to attenuate the storm runoff is adequate. The HydroCad® pond model provides the maximum water elevation, volume stored, and infiltration rate attained. OR and Water Separators Oil and water separators will be sized based on the Stormwater Management Policy and the report from the Pio eer Valley Planning Commission. These policies and guidelines state that 400 -cubic fe rage per contributing acre of impervious area be provided within the tank. The following information was used performing the calculations for the drainage system., NRCS Soils Informs on The NRCS Soil Survey for Nantucket lists the site as Evesboro sand (EvA). The NRCS drainage class for this soil type A. Based on record septic system design soil evaluations conducted throughout the region, it is confirmed that the site's correct specific drainage classification is "A". Please refer to the appendices for copies of the NRCS soil survey map and soil evaluation records of proposed septic system designs. 1. Existing & Proposed Ground Covers: The existing ground cover for the site consists of a densely wooded forest of pine trees and scrub oak. The Curve Numbers listed below, hydrologic soil type A, were used in all the calculations performed with HydroCad®. RUNOFF CURVE NUMBERS Cover Description Cover Type Hydrologic condition Curve Number Dense Grass, Woods Good 30 landscaping, Lawns Good 39 Dirt Road Good 72 Gravel Road Good I 76 Rooftops, Pavements - 98 2. Rainfall Data (24 Hour Storm Duration*) Storm Event IRainfall 25 -Year 1 5.9 inches * From U.S. Department of Commerce Weather Bureau T.P. 40, May 1961., see attached. .S0 0 TOWN OF NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS ."'EIVED F =' ;,-/F ASSESSORS APR 3 0 2003 "OWN OF N ;-,. `ITUCKET, MA LIST OF PARTIES IN INTEREST i% TIS MATTER OF THE PETITION OF Y� Sao -HG PROPERTY OWNER:... [�,V�.�'�..._...... MAILINGADDRESS: .............................. ............. ............................................. PROPERTY LOCATION: ... I._. ..�_..., �� ... ... �... . ..... l c i,c1 r ASSESSORS MAP/PARCEL:.. .1..-.a.4).;...U-:!.... Uva :.d,eteci SIJB�IITTED BY:.��':c!t', C u (L�.G_s.ti. 1—�c�.`?. C��,.((1........ SEE ATTACHED PAGES I cenify that the foregoing is z list d persons who are owners of aburting propemy, o\vn s o' directly opposite on any public or pnvate street or wav; and abutters of the abutters and all o,'. - land o\\.„ers within three hundred feet of the properTy line of owner's property, all as tl on the n-:ost recent applic2ble tax lis: (! . A.G.L. c. 40A, Section. 1 I Zoning Code Chapter 1.) Section 139-29D (2) ). r DATE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE TOWN OF NANTjUCKF- i N 0 O, O� 4 - I, J J J J � O � O O, W W N N N V V b b 00 O O O J J T A g T q b• m J N N O W N N O J W N N N N V• g U r/ N pp wj b {yb� Z W Y b Q O �1 y j y� b 1pygG o 0 '! q S iQM' M C4 �y w G 1p w IN 10 w H H X7 pNj q {� q Id w n In A Y t, T� ?1 (HM] Al f7ir • O HH 4 pH 4 y �' ° a H w NN w � • ii w H K rK� O U W U O N O O O O O O O N O b N1 }Q O O K ?Rag � Q Ny 1+ t i 'A N Y ► H t1 tl ► gC L� wH S�, C p b Tw�ppp gg W u w W W W O o 0 0 0 OO O O o N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U, %R W U N U U U U U U U • U U1 U g U U U U• N U N O b N tl U U U• b I I I C r t2l • H F G H IN. d N t U W" •, w w w r Y n U• J Y N N N N W U q b tl b tl N• w b N o o• 0 0 0 U o 4,• tl r q q q p g q� y b b n MO �' ag 1•+ r r r r r b a tl b b b a n r' 6 2aA- os -1- 03 RISING TIDE DEVELOPMENT LLC 32 ARLINGTON STREET CAMBRIDGE MASSACHUSETTS 02140 617.549.3232 TEL • 617.492.1143 FAX • josh posnerGattbi.com May 30, 2003 Nantucket Board of Appeals Town of Nantucket 1 East Chestnut Street Nantucket, MA 02554 Re: Rugged Scott LLC Comprehensive Permit Application Dear Board Members: Under MG.L. Chapter 40B the Board is given 30 days from the filing date to begin the process of reviewing the above referenced application which we have filed May 30, 2003. Given the logistical and scheduling considerations which we have discussed with the Zoning Administrator, this letter serves to extend the time period during which the Board must begin the review process until August 15, 2003. We understand that the Board currently has targeted July 31, 2003 as the date for the first public hearing. We look forward to working with you to review our proposal. Rugged Scott LLC by Joshua Posner cc: Arthur I. Reade, Jr. Esq. W 1-11 910 / READE, GULLICKSEN, HANLEY & GIFFORD, LLP SIX YOUNG'S WAY ARTHUR I. READE, JR., P.C. NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554 KENNETH A. GULLICKSEN MAILING ADDRESS MARIANNE HANLEY (508) 228-3128 POST OFFICE BOX 2669 WHITNEY A. GIFFORD FAX: (508) 228-5630 NANTUCKET, MASS. 02584 MICHAEL PEARSON March 25, 2004 BY HAND DELIVERY Nantucket Board of Appeals 1 East Chestnut Street Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Re: Rugged Scott LLC Comprehensive Permit Application Dear Board Members: This will confirm, pursuant to agreement entered into between the applicant and the Board of Appeals at the March 17, 2004 public meeting, that the time within which the Board of Appeals must enter its decision is enlarged to and including May 20, 2004. Very ruly yours, L Axthur I. Reade, Jr., as attorney and agent for Rugged Scott LLC air@readelaw.com AIR/iry 0 cc: Mr. Joshua Posner --i- Rising Tide Development LLC' 32 Arlington Street Cambridge, Massachusetts 02140 r r 0 F:\WpOPQ\Posner\ZBA04LTR.doc Abend Associates '1 U Traffic & Transportation Planning Services TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM From: Michael R. Abend Date: July 10, 2003 y SUBJECT: TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT 1 RISING TIDE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT RUGGED ROAD, NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS INTRODUCTION/PURPOSE This memorandum provides an assessment of the expected traffic impact of a proposed residential development along Rugged Road in Nantucket, Massachusetts. The project calls for a total of 72 dwelling units with access along both Rugged Road and Scotts Way. Exhibit 1 is a schematic plan of the proposed development. This assessment is abbreviated because of the availability of a report done last year in relation to the development of the Nantucket Electric Company (NEC) subdivision just northeast of this site. That study described local traffic conditions and evaluated traffic and safety in the vicinity of both that site and this site and was reviewed by local boards. The data from that report is used to establish the baseline traffic conditions used in this analysis. The number of new vehicle trips and their distribution for this project are estimated here and overlaid onto the baseline conditions to determine what impacts this project will have on local traffic conditions. In relying on the work done for the NEC, the specific reports referenced include: 1. Proposed Pine Lands Drive Subdivision, NEC Property, Fairgrounds Road, Nantucket, Massachusetts. Traffic Impact Analysis, April 2002. 2. Proposed Pine Lands Drive Subdivision, Nantucket Electric Company Property, Fairgrounds Road, Nantucket, Massachusetts. Addendum to Traffic Impact Analysis, July 2002. The above reports are hereinafter referred to collectively as the "NEC studies". 265 Winn Street, Burlington, Massachusetts 01803-2616 (781) 273-5383 FAX 273-3053 �t STUDY AREA/EXISTING CONDITIONS 1 The NEC studies covered several intersections surrounding that project including Fairgrounds Road at Surfside Road/South Shore Road, Fairgrounds Road at Old South Road, and Old South j Road at Amelia Drive, and the rotary at Old South Road/Milestone Road/Sparks Avenue/Orange 1 Street. Descriptions of these roadways and intersections are provided in the NEC traffic studies. The two roadways and intersections that are not included in that study that are specifically relevant to this project are Rugged Road and Scotts Way and their intersections with Fairgrounds Road. These roadways are described here. `1 Rugged Road is a twenty -foot wide, ,paved roadway with cape -cod berms but no striping. There ? is a bike path along the northerly side setback from the roadway. Seikennow Way is approximately several hundred feet south of the intersection. There are no traffic controls except for a Sloe Children sign at the entrance to Rugged Road. While Rugged Road does have a connection south to Lovers Lane, the connection is rough and accessible only to vehicles with high clearance. This connection is limited to approximately one and one-half lanes wide. Scotts ? Way is a dirt roadway that is a variable width of approximately 14 -to -20 feet with no curbs or I sidewalks. There are no traffic controls along this roadway. Both roadways serve residential land uses and have flat grades. Their intersections with Fairgrounds Road are at ninety degrees and do not have any type of signage or striping to control side street traffic. It is noteworthy that Fairgrounds Road has a passing zoning through both intersections, evidence that the roadway is r flat and straight with excellent visibility. ? Traffic Volumes I The NEC traffic studies relied on counts collected in January 2002 and adjusted to July volumes based on data provided to them by the Nantucket Planning and Economic Development Commission (NP&EDC). The count data was included in the appendix to the April NEC study and the seasonal adjustment data was included in the appendices of the July NEC study. The I data and the adjustment were accepted by NP&EDC and the peer review. Accident Data J The NEC studies documented accidents at the study area intersections for 2000 and 2001 based on information from the Nantucket Police Department and for the years 1998 through 2000 from the MassHighway department database. The overall conclusions of that analysis were that the i non -rotary intersections in the area had accident rates generally below the MassHighway Department District 5 average (Nantucket is within District 5). While the rotary accident rate : was 1.08 accidents per million entering vehicles (mev), it was concluded in the NEC study (and Abend Associates � p � `1 jnot contradicted by the peer reviewer) that it was not considered to be critical. The frill discussion of accidents and the data is included in the NEC studies. There were no accidents { listed involving either Rugged Road or Scotts Way. i 1 Abend Associates researched the state's database for all of Fairgrounds Road to confirm the j previous study and also to determine if any accidents occurred at Scotts Way or Rugged Road. There were a total of nine accidents listed. Two were at Surfside Road, two were at Trotters Lane, and one each at Old South Road and Rugged Road; the last three were simply listed for Fairgrounds Road with no intersecting street. The data is included in the appendix. FUTURE NO BUILD CONDITIONS ' In evaluating the impacts of this project, it is appropriate to follow the traffic impact assessment P methodology of estimating traffic conditions in the firture without the project. It is against that i baseline that the project impacts are measured. Typically, a five-year horizon is used, in this case the year 2008. In developing that 2008 condition, the information provided in the NEC study has been used. The NEC study had a development horizon of 2007 condition. The build condition in that i analysis included traffic associated with general growth as well as traffic associated with the NEC project. That condition was presented in the July 2002 study. In developing the 2008 1 baseline condition for this analysis, the 2007 Build data from the NEC study has been increased by three percent to reflect 2008 condition. The volumes for baseline conditions are presented in ? Exhibits 2. The three percent annual growth rate was based on information provided by NP&EDC and the trips associated with the NEC development are based on the trip projections and distribution of that study. 1 PROJECT -RELATED TRAFFIC In projecting vehicle trips to and from this residential project the most appropriate source is Tr' 1 Generation published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), 6th edition, 1997. This is the same source for trip generation data used in the NEC studies and it is designated as the primary source by the state and most local review boards. The appropriate land use code for this analysis is #210, Single-Fanzily Detached Dwelling. The relevant pages from that report are attached in the appendix to this memorandum. Based on information in that report, there would be 60 morning peak hour trips (15 inbound/45 outbound), 80 evening peak hour trips (51 inbound/29 outbound), and 766 trips per day (3 8' inbound/383 outbound) at this site. This information is summarized in Exhibit 3. 1 Abend Associates 6 -4- r 7 ,i Reviewers are often surprised that the ITE numbers for vehicle trips outbound during the 1 morning and inbound during the evening is not equal to at least the number of proposed homes. However, the information represents the one-hour periods during the morning and during the 1 evening when traffic peaks. Typically, households have people leaving anywhere between 6:00 and 10:00 AM as people head for school, work, or errands/appointments. In the afternoon/evening there are generally more trips but they are spread over a longer period. Thus, the volumes seem low when first reviewed. �j Supporting these low trip rates is data from the 1990 US Census. Information from the US j Census web page provides responses from 112 million people on when they left for work in the morning. Of the total respondents, only 31.7 percent indicated that they left for work between i 7:00 and 8:00 AM, the highest one-hour period in the survey. This data is attached. In fact, the numbers cited above may be higher than can be expected at this location during the summer peak season due to several factors. First, these single-family homes will not be quite the same as "standard subdivision" single-family homes. That is, the data associated with single- family homes from ITE is based on standard suburban subdivisions where each home is independent of the others in terms of ownership, maintenance, and other factors. In a neighborhood where there are a number of duplex units, the interdependence between homeowners is greater, and therefore, the number of trips will be slightly less as they coordinate 1 normal independent activities, such as landscaping, home services, etc. Another factor to consider is that during the peak season the houses here may not all be occupied by year-round residents. Peak hour trips are not going to dominate a family's vacation home schedule. Finally, Nantucket has a strong Traffic Demand Management (TDM) commitment. This community's commitment discourages owner -occupied vehicle use and encourages shuttle and bike use, especially towards the downtown area. The shuttle bus runs past the site along Fairgrounds Road. For these reasons, the above -referenced trips are likely higher than what will occur at site. Nonetheless, no adjustment is made here to account for this, in order to be conservative and present a worst-case condition. 1 The distribution of these residential site trips is based on the distribution used in the NEC studies, as updated in the July Addendum. The distribution is provided in Exhibit 4. Combining the trip generation data from Exhibit 3 with the distribution estimates in Exhibit 4 provides the i number of new trips associated with the project along local streets and at local intersections. These volumes are shown schematically in Exhibit 5. These volumes are combined with the no 1 build vohu ies (Exhibit 2) to establish the future build volumes. These are shown schematically i in Exhibit 6, respectively. Abend Associates -5 - ACCESS DESIGN i r The project will have three access points, two along Rugged Road and one along Scotts Way. 1 The access onto Scotts Way and the northwesterly access onto Rugged Road will be two-way with a width of twenty-four feet. The second access onto Rugged Road will be one-way outbound, only allowing traffic to exit onto Rugged Road. ad. The access points along Scotts Way and Rugged Road will be located on straight segments of each of these roadways. Some minor clearing of the shoulders on either side of the new roadways will be necessary to ensure adequate visibility in both directions. 1 j IMPACT ANALYSIS 1 Operations at each of the study area intersections have been evaluated based on the methodology established by the Federal Highway Administration and described in the Highway Capacity Manual, 2001. A complete description of the methodology and the levels of service that result from the calculations are included in the appendix. The specific results of the analysis may differ 1 slightly from those presented in the NEC studies due to slightly different assumptions as to the underlying layout, but mostly due to the fact that the calculations done here rely on the Synchro5 software, while the NEC studies were based on the HCS 2000 software. Both are accepted but have slightly different algorithms that result in slightly different results. Regardless, the net jimpact of the project is generally the same as long as the analysis of both no build and build conditions relies on one or the other but not a mixture of both. The levels of service results are shown in Exhibit 7. Fairgrounds Road at Surfside Road/South Shore Road — This four-way unsignalized 1 intersection operates at level of service C under the future baseline conditions with average delays of about 23 seconds overall. This includes delays to South Shore Road of approximately 80 seconds and delays to Fairgrounds Road of approximately 30 seconds. The overall delay increases to 26 seconds and the level of service changes to D with the project in place. Delays Y on South Shore Road and Fairgrounds Road increased to 90 seconds and 35 seconds, respectively. In the evening this intersection operates at level of service F with average delays in excess of two minutes, both overall and on both side streets under no build conditions. This condition continues in the fixture with the project. FairLyrounds Road at Old South Road — In the morning under fixture no build conditions the intersection operates at level of service C with an average delay of approximately 15 seconds overall and approximately 110 seconds for the flows turning left out of Fairgrounds Road. This i analysis assumes that left and right turning traffic have separate lanes as proposed as part of the Abend Associates I� -6- mitigation for the NEC project. With this project's traffic included, the level of service remains ii at Coverall with average delays of approximately two seconds longer, 17 seconds overall. With project -related trips the average delay increases to more than 120 seconds per vehicle for the left turn out of Fairgrounds Road. With or without the project the right turn out of Fairgrounds Road are at approximately 15/16 seconds. hi the evening the overall level of service at this intersection i is at F and this is the case for both left and right turning vehicles out of Fairgrounds Road. With the project in place, this level of service continues in the future for all traffic exiting Fairgrounds Road. Fairgrounds Road at Scotts Way/Rugged Road — Because neither Scotts Way nor Rugged Road carry a significant volume of traffic, they have been combined for this analysis. This is a worst-case condition since it assumes that traffic associated with both streets uses a single access j point to and from the proposed development. Under actual conditions traffic will be distributed between the two roadways, thereby having a lesser impact than documented in this analysis. Neither intersection was specifically counted as part of this study because of the low volumes associated with both roadways. It has been assumed that the two roadways combined carry less 1 than twenty inbound and twenty outbound vehicles during the peak hours; given the actual j number of residences along both roadways this is a very conservative assumption. The assumption is that there are ten inbound trips and ten outbound trips in each direction along Fairgrounds Road. Under this assumption, the level of service at this intersection is at A in the future with average delays of approximately 13 seconds in the morning and 16 seconds in the evening, levels of service B and C, respectively. With project traffic added, the levels of service remain unchanged with the average delay increasing by only one or two seconds for the side street flows. Through traffic on Fairgrounds Road is unaffected by the increase in traffic associated with the site with average delay of approximately one second or less. Discussion i Drivers pulling out of Fairgrounds Road at either end (onto Old South Road or onto Surfside Road) have long delays, level of service F. This is due partly to the high volume making these turns and partly to the amount of through traffic along Surfside Road and Old South Road. In order to improve the level of service at these locations, there are only a limited number of ' mitigation options. Adding approach lanes only isolates the delays to the specific movements r that suffer the most — typically the left turns out of Fairgrounds Road. Adding lanes provides no relief for long left -turn delays. The only way to reduce delays at these intersections is with the i installation of a traffic signal or the assigmnent of a police officer. Abend Associates -7 - The operating conditions at these intersections are not significantly affected by the project. Exhibit 8 presents a table showing the impact that this project will have on the volumes at the nearby intersections. At Fairgrounds Road/Surfside Road/South Shore Road the project adds between two and three percent to the overall volumes, approximately 30 per hour or one every two minutes. At Fairgrounds Road/Old South Road the project adds between 30 and 40 vehicles per hour, an increase of approximately two percent to the volumes under the baseline condition. While the volumes at the Scotts Way and Rugged Road intersections with Fairgrounds Road will increase more significantly (between eight and ten percent), these intersections both can easily accommodate this increase in traffic without straining their capacity. TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS As noted above there are no measures that can be undertaken — short of signalization or police officer control — to improve operations at either end of Fairgrounds Road. These operational deficiencies exist under current conditions and are expected to continue in the fixture with or without this project in place. This having been said, there are improvements that can be made in the vicinity of the site to enhance traffic and pedestrian safety. These are listed below: Provide stop signs and stop lines at both Scotts Way and Rugged Road at Fairgrounds Road. This assumes that Scotts Way will be paved as part of the development of this site. Posting appropriate Intersection Ahead signs along Fairgrounds Road at these intersections as well as at other existing intersections may also be desirable. 2. Provide a bike path along Scotts Way from Fairgrounds Road to the intersection of the site access roadway and extend the existing bikeway along Rugged Road to the southerly access to the site. There are no other measures that the proponent could reasonably undertake to offset the project's modest impacts along the local roadways. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION j This memorandum has reviewed the expected traffic impacts of a proposed single-family residential subdivision off of Rugged Road and Scotts Way in Nantucket, Massachusetts. It has jrelied on the previous analysis for the Nantucket Electric Company subdivision, which was reviewed and approved by the town last year. The future conditions established in that analysis were used as a baseline for this analysis to provide for a consistent comparison of traffic impacts. Abend Associates —8— The trips associated with this project are estimated based on standard industry practice and i overlaid on the baseline conditions. The result is that the project will have a minor impact on 1 local traffic conditions, increasing volumes at either end of Fairgrounds Road by approximately ! two to three percent at peak times. The 72 single-family homes proposed for this site are expected to generate at total of approximately 770 trips per days, with half inbound to the site and half outbound. During the morning peak hour approximately 60 trips are expected (with 15 inbound and 45 outbound). In the evening the peal. hour volume is expected to be 80 trips with 51 inbound and 29 outbound. These trips are expected to exhibit the same characteristic as those associated with nearby neighborhoods both north and south of Fairgrounds Road, i.e., dominated by passenger vehicles. The patterns and directional orientation is also expected to be consistent with existing neighborhoods in the area. The trip projections are based on typical, suburban trip rates that are likely higher than can be expected here on Nantucket. In the summer peak season (which this analysis considers) Nantucket has a high percentage of vacationers, people that do not tend to come and go at the normal peak time but who often come and go at off peal. times. Also, since many houses are second homes, it is likely they will not all be occupied all the time, even in the summer. In addition, Nantucket has a strong community commitment to alternative transportation including 1 bicycling and shuttle services. These alternatives — again, especially during peak season — will 1 lead to lower vehicle trips than would be expected based on standard industry rates. Operations at either end of Fairgrounds Road, at Surfside Road and at Old South Road, currently operate poorly during one or both peak hours. This is expected to continue in the future with or without the project. Short of providing signalization or police officer control at peak times, these levels of service will continue to be poor in the fixture. There are no measures which the applicant can undertake to offset this modest impact. It is recommended that advance -warning signs be posted along Fairgrounds Road warning of the intersections at Scotts Way and Rugged Road since the volumes in and out of these roadways will increase as a result of this development. Further, it is recommended that stop signs and stop lines be provided at end of these two roadways to improve safety and that a bikeway be provided along Scotts Ways and the one that exist along Rugged Road be extended to this project. Aside from these modest improvements there are no measures that can reasonably be undertaken by the applicant to offset the project's impacts. 20319-MIMUcket-residential i Abend Associates o I I ro 3Nc xn.Jr / v p CA ya'� n JI E5 d�idliWei i � st A'py '" J, /•% a,ej:�; �� EJ II J E a NSI e L' Jia, , �.• � `? AtlM uNtl - JFf�IkJ %�; f J,tlM OMI n> I - I EIR Doi xnw, � r • i 51105 \ �-- This plan is for orientation purposes only and may not be consistent with the lastest proposed site plan. Exhibit SCHEMATIC SITE PLAN Residential Development 1 Nantucket Massachusetts Abend Associates a Qp aQ' J� Crj 41(0— sa 3'7 c0 Schematic: Not to scale. MORNING PEAK HOUR rJ ri �D $9 S°nth �6 1 10 61 Schematic: Not to scale. EVENING PEAK HOUR FUTURE BASELINE/ NO BUILD VOLUMES Co U0 0 U 0 U Ca NORTH Fairgrounds Road oS9 NORTH Fairgrounds Road 523 � la Y) � M J1 146 2 -SZ - Co 0 0 • I F1 0 CE 0 Exhibit Residential Development 2 Naiztucket Massachusetts Abend Associates r Ct 0 i ZS -0 N Cz 0 0 U) _-0 O Exhibit Residential Development 2 Naiztucket Massachusetts Abend Associates Peak Hour Volumes Morning Evening In Out In Out Average Daily Volumes In Out 72 Single Family Homes 15 45 51 29 383 383 Source: ITE land Use #210, Single -Family Detached Dwellings Exhibit TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY Residential Development 3 Nantucket Massachusetts Abend Associates DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTION Residential Development Exhibit4 Nantucket MassachLtscttS Abend Associates A a o`� Q 0 1w14' T NORTH i Via � Fairgrounds Road ow4 wn Road nth SroCe So V/ co SITE o -00,tr 0 �_ cc: 3(% ii Schematic: Not to scale. o 0) 0 Cf) � a O DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTION Residential Development Exhibit4 Nantucket MassachLtscttS Abend Associates A a `a Q'o �Q' G� NORTH T ti G rr 0 Fairgrounds Road 3 �CD 16 � NN 0 M SITE o _0 0 Schematic: Not to scale. MORNING PEAK HOUR ° a o`1r Q aQ5 NORTH T Z M 0 S Fairgrounds Road r o 2V� -� S°,,tr Sr i ZZ q � f �. (4 r cA Cz cz� SITE o c 0 Schematic: Not to scale. o M cn m o EVENING PEAK HOUR ° Exhibit PROJECT -RELATED VOLUMES Residential Development 5 Nantucket Massachusetts Abend Associates a C) aQ' Z - J G9 „i -4-2-7) a �61 S°O Sr°ce R° 37Z ro Schematic: Not to scale. MORNING PEAK HOUR r� L T ~ °16 °vth Sr°re R°aa Schematic: Not to scale. EVENING PEAK HOUR a Cz 0 U .41 5° Zz ---� FUTURE BUILD VOLUMES NORTH Fairgrounds Road r` 9 NN SITE o M CD n M ., NORTH Fairgrounds Road 523 f— ZC) Nr SITE a 0 c- -0 0 m M 10-M 152 j 268 —� Ct 0 o= 0 WE X29 38'i 0 0 II I� 0 o bs cn T Exhibit Residential Development 6 Nantucket Massachusetts Abend Associates 0 O N U EXhlDlt LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY Residential Development 7 Nantucket Massachusetts Abend Associates U Lfl M O N O O N OJ pM O uO O O O D t0 0 0 0^ O o r o , m L' 2i O n n � 0 n n n O 00 O UI O LL LL LL Q Q Ll. ll LL Q Q Q Q Q U co J � U O N h M 00 Q O ( 00 LO N O O •C > d' N O O N 0 0 0 O O O N � LL>I m L0 NN N NN p rn o , o z COw o A 00 ca)j0 A A A ON UI LL LL LL Q Q LL Il LL Q Q Q Q Q U OO U O h O ON n M rn O V -i N N 0 N O O O 0 0 0 O � af0 L0 O Ln r+ 'D O M O N O ^� L N 0 M V ^ 0 = O L OI Q LL LU Q Q U LL U Q Q Q Q Q m y CL cm cm Q= U � o -+ � � ,� Ly i N O O _-06 o7 6 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LL 7 •a jG O M O] O '"i Ln In M O -'� O z0 � W 00 � N OO� L O U LL p Q Q U� U Q Q 0 Q Q Q m J L 0 LO �' Q' IM L > L- n M> a +� a � 6 N O O O IIl L L •D U7 III O O M O L_ 7 _ C MO U-) 0) Ln o o�� CC 0 D t7 iJ U- U- L 0-0 O O _ -0 c-0-0 'r) — U - U -o o 0 v c cL O O (A OL � M O i (0 6�� -W C C U)LL/1 O O O '~ -0-0 u v ov M >>�a� M to L C .0 41C O Q N ( f6 N 4� 4�� L fC 41 O Ln L9 V) O L_ OC Q Q O L O t' y ll ll c C O C 3 O O L cn CT O L C L LL M LL LL 0 O N U EXhlDlt LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY Residential Development 7 Nantucket Massachusetts Abend Associates Peak Hour Traffic Volume Comparison Morning Evening 2008 2008 2008 2008 No Build W/Project No Build W/Project Fairgrounds Road at Surfside Road/ South Shore Road -- +8.4% Approach Volumes: 933 959 1,472 1,506 vehicle increase: -- +26 -- +34 percent impact: -- +2.8% -- +2.3% Fairgrounds Road at Scotts Wav/Rueeed Road Approach Volumes: 630 690 953 1,033 vehicle increase: -- +60 -- +80 percent impact: -- +9.5% -- +8.4% Fairgrounds Road at Old South Road Approach Volumes: 1,466 1,496 2,042 2,081 vehicle increase: -- +30 -- +39 percent impact: -- +2.0% -- +1.9% Exhibit TRAFFIC VOLUME COMPARISON Residential Development g Nantucket Massachusetts Abend Associates APPENDIX Accident Data 2 CL (L CL IL ¢ EL < O 5 C,4 co: OD � 0 o 45 m 0 Ly 2 0 0 '0 O 0, 0 0 0, C) . ............. Cj cj, (D 0 r 10 Ci ,: 0 N f0 l64, a141 C, _j 0 L) 5 m LL F- U) C ch tm� 25" or.- = >1 S4 - -E m c m m Cta m m m 0 D,; p.0 a 0 a) _0 0 m c a c r- C 0 u m m z zez m m (o z zlz Z !W! o L) L) ui LU U) N LL LL LL LL LL LL LL Q� 9 0 LLLL LL C Z= 0 .F c Z�LZ!Z! 3:1 UJ}OC!UJ?W!LUO;W`Lu O N < e; LL Q Q U Y Q! CD W ZILLt 0 w to <LLJZ,Z;Z�Z < c0 r Z' Z V) C/) z z C:) 0, CD OHO 0, C, 0 lL cc 'D o io CD C), C) Z z Z% 5 5 5 �5 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N, M N C14 N cq D N 2 CL (L CL IL ¢ EL < O 5 C,4 co: OD � 0 o 45 m 0 (61 L6 C) Cj cj, C) _j 0) 4) a) LL F- U) N a) C) F - C c c 0, Z Z -P r- c c a c r- C m C13 cc Z z Z, u m m z zez m m (o z zlz � Z o Z_j , L) ui LU U) Q) I P) D 0 9 Q� 9 . 0 Lu (n 1 Lij (n LL LL � 0 0 C), 0 w to to F- 0,0-0 0Z Z Z R m 5 5 Z Z Z 5 5 5 Z z Z% 5 5 5 �5 0 0 0 0 0 0 CiO:O L�- LL LL LIL, LIL yL LL , LL, Relevant ITE Pages TRIP GENERATION 61h Edition a Volume 2 of 3 TiuP GENE ATION RASES, PLOTS, AND EQUATIONS • Institutional (Land Uses 500-599) • Medical (Land Uses 600-699) • Office (Land Uses 700-799) • Retail (Land Uses 800-899) • Services (Land Uses 900-999) 1i Institute of Transportation Engineers ,i Trip Generation, 6th Edition Pm Iniormational Report of the Instirste of Transportation Engineers Volume 2 of 3 The institute of Transportation Engineers (IT') is an international educational and scientific association of transportation and traffic engineers and other professionals who are responsible for meeting mobility and safety needs. The Institute facilitates the application of technology and scientific principles to research, planning, functional design, implementation, operation, policy development and management for any mode of transportation by promoting professional development of members, supporting and encouraging education, stimulating research, developing public awareness, and exchanging professional information; and by maintaining of a central point of reference and action. Founded in 1930, the Institute serves as a gateway to knowledge and advancement through meetings, seminars, and publications; and through our network of approximately 15,000 members working in some 80 countries. The Institute also has more than 70 local and regional chapters and more than 90 student chapters that provide additional opportunities for information exchange, participation and networking. ft�� Institute of Transportation Engineers 525 School St., S.W., Suite 410 Washington, D.C. 20024-2797 USA Telephone: +1 (202) 554-8050 Fax: +1 (202) 863-5486 ITE on the Web: http://www.ite.org 01997 Institute of Transportation Engineers. All rights reserved. Publication No. IR -016D Second Printing 1000,/AC-5/1197 iSbN 0-93 5403-09-4 ..P. -a cCe 'Inited 'States of Land Use: 210 Single -Family Detached Housing Description Single-family detached housing includes all single-family detached Homes on individual lots. A typical site surveyed is a suburban subdivision. Additional Data The peak hour of the generator typically coincides with the peak hour of the adjacent street traffic. The sites were surveyed from the late 1960s to the mid-1990s throughout the United States and Canada. The number of vehicles and the number of residents have a high correlation with average weekday vehicle trip ends. The use of these variables is limited, however, because the number of vehicles and residents is often difficult to obtain or predict. The number of dwelling units is generally used as the independent variable of choice because it is usually readily available, easy to project, and has a high correlation with average weekday vehicle trip ends. This land use includes data from a wide variety of units with different sizes, price ranges, locations, and ages. Consequently, there is a wide variation in trips generated within this category. As expected, dwelling units that were larger in size, more expensive, or farther away from the central business district (CBD) had a higher rate of trip generation per unit than those smaller in size, less expensive, or closer to the CBD. Other factors, such as geographic location and type of adjacent and nearby development, may also have had an effect on the site trip generation. Single-family detached units have the highest trip generation rate per dwelling unit of all residential uses, because they are the largest units in size and have more residents and more vehicles per unit than other residential land uses; they are generally located farther away from shopping centers, employment areas, and other trip attractors than are other residential land uses; and they generally have fewer alternate modes of transportation available, because they are typically not as concentrated as other residential land uses. Source Numbers 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 19, 20, 21, 26, 34, 35, 36, 38, 40, 71, 72, 84, 91, 98, 100, 105, 108, 110, 114, 117, 119, 157, 167, 177, 187, 192, 207, 211, 246, 275, 283, 293, 300, 319, 320, 357, 3B4, 435 Trip Generation, 6th Edition 262 Institute of Transportation Engineers Single -Family Detached Housing (210) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units On a: Weekday Number of Studies: 348 Avg. Number of Dwelling Units: 198 Directional Distribution: 50% entering, 50% exiting Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 9.57 4.31 - 21.85 3.69 Data Plot and Equation 30,000 U) 20,000 LU CL I lI 10,000 0 X X X X — - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X X X X 0 1000 X = Number of Dwelling Units A Actual Data Points Fitted Curve Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T) = 0.920 Ln(X) + 2.707 2000 ------ Average Rate R2 = 0.96 3000 Trip Generation, 6th Edition 263 Institute of Transportation Engineers Single -Family Detached Housing (210) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. Number of Studies 271 Avg. Number of Dwelling Units: 202 Directional Distribution: 250/0 entering, 750/o exiting Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.75 0.33 - 2.27 0.90 Data Plot and Eauation z 2,00( 1,000 0 1DUO 2000 X = Number of Dwelling Units Actual Data Points Fitted Curve Fitted Curve Equation: T = 0.700(.X) 9.477 ------ Average Rate R2 = 0.69 3000 Trio Ganeration, olh Edition 264 Institute of TransOonation Engineer Single -Family Detached Housing (210) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. Number of Studies: 294 Avg. Number of Dwelling Units: 216 Directional Distribution: 6450 entering, 36% exiting Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 1.01 0.42 - 2.96 1.05 Data Plot and Equation 3.000 N C 2.000 W CL F- m U CD m M t0 m Q 11 1,000 0 0 1000 X = Number of Dwelling Units Actual Data Points Fitted Curve Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T) = 0.901 Ln(X) + 0.527 2000 -- - - -- Average Rate R2 = 0.91 3000 trip Generation. 6th Edition 265 Institute of Transportation engineers Level of Service Description LOS The average control delay per vehicle is estimated for each lane group and aggregated for each approach and for the intersection as a whole. LOS is directly related to the control delay value. The criteria are listed in Exhibit 16-2. EXHIBIT 16-2. LOS CRITERIA FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS LOS Control Delay per Vehicle (s/veh) A <- 10 B > 10-20 C > 20-35 0 > 35-55 E > 55-80 F > 80 EXHIBIT 17-2. LEVEL -OF -SERVICE CRITERIA FOR TWSC INTERSECTIONS Level of Service Average Control Delay (s/veh) A 0-10 B > 10-15 C > 15-25 D > 25-35 E > 35-50 F > 50 Highway Capacity Manual 2000 Abend Associates ,1 a Capacity Calculations For the purpose of the calculations, Fairgrounds Road runs east -west while other roads run north -south. P C� �l HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6/4/2003 3: South Shore Road & Surfside Road Movement ;;: Et3L ; EB = ..EBI .:11VI3L , �1LOT ":1tU.BR.. �1�IBI*, ;NB7 1s� Volume Left Lane Configurations 63 1 266 Volume Right 7 192 54 ' cSH 188 415 1450 Sign Control Volume to Capacity Stop 0.68 0.00 Stop Queue Length (ft) 145 Free 0 18 Free 77.6 Grade Volume (veh/h) 59 0% 77 6 58 0% 23 177 1 0% 118 50 245 0% 88 31 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 34 Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 64 84 7 63 25 192 1 128 54 266 96 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) vC, conflicting volume 1008 830 112 851 820 155 129 183 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 52 66 99 64 90 78 100 81 cM capacity (veh/h) 135 246 938 175 249 888 1450 1386 ireW.ior/t Labe`#t Volume Total 154 280 184 396 Volume Left 64 63 1 266 Volume Right 7 192 54 34 cSH 188 415 1450 1386 Volume to Capacity 0.82 0.68 0.00 0.19 Queue Length (ft) 145 122 0 18 Control Delay (s) 77.6 30.0 0.1 6.1 Lane LOS F D A A Approach Delay (s) 77.6 30.0 0.1 6.1 Approach LOS F D intersection Summa ..' Average Delay 22.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.3% ICU Level of Service C Rising Tide, Nantucket 6/4/2003 Baseline Synchro 5 Light Report 2008 Baseline No Build AM Page 1 ABENDASMAL-LT51 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6/4/2003 6: Fairgrounds Road & Scotts Way/Rugged Road y } r y + g� P 4i F § ��B' Sjp �6�Y Yl. '�3✓TtE:�{ A-} �-5 NOR Direcirort acne Volume Total 415 .291 22 Volume Left 0 11 Moumerrt ;i ,�, : , „w", '11'�ap� t�E Lane Configurations 11 0 11 cSH 1700 1155 Sign Control Free 0.24 0.01 Free Stop 0 Grade 0% Control Delay (s) 0.0 0% 0% Lane LOS Volume (veh/h) 372 10 10 258 10 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 404 11 11 280 11 11 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right tum flare (veh) Median type, None Median storage veh) vC, conflicting volume 415 712 410 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 99 97 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 1155 398 646 y } r y + g� P 4i F § ��B' Sjp �6�Y Yl. '�3✓TtE:�{ A-} �-5 NOR Direcirort acne Volume Total 415 .291 22 Volume Left 0 11 11 Volume Right 11 0 11 cSH 1700 1155 493 Volume to Capacity 0.24 0.01 0.04 Queue Length (ft) 0 1 3 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.4 12.6 Lane LOS A B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.4 12.6 Approach LOS B { ' .•, r'itD3 .,, 's --a,Pow �: _ Average Delay Intersection Capacity Utilization 0.5 31.9%ICU Level of Service A Rising Tide, Nantucket 6/4/2003 Baseline Synchro 5 Light Report 2008 Baseline No Build AM Page 2 ABENDASMAL-LT51 i HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis , 8: Fairgrounds Road & Old South Road 6/4/2003 --1 -'4" 4\ I Movement EBL'' EBI3 j t+181_ I±JBI T ,r 15aM. Lane Configurations Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 146 252 124 500 353 91 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 159 274 135 543 384 99 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right tum flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) vC, conflicting volume 1246 433 483 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 5 56 87 cM capacity (veh/h) 167 620 1075 � �S E$.EB 5., Direction, t -ane:# ..;,. Volume Total 159 274 678 483 Volume Left 159 0 135 0 Volume Right 0 274 0 99 cSH 167 620 1075 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.95 0.44 0.13 0.28 Queue Length (ft) 180 56 11 0 Control Delay (s) 112.2 15.3 3.1 0.0 Lane LOS F C A Approach Delay (s) 50.8 3.1 0.0 Approach LOS F lntOr 601on Summa► i F �i t , t .- 4 s. tv Average Delay 15.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 81.1% ICU Level of Service D Rising Tide, Nantucket 6/4/2003 Baseline Synchro 5 Light Report 2008 Baseline No Build AM Page 3 { ABENDASMAL-LT51 If HCM Unsignalized intersection Capacity Analysis 3: South Shore Road & Surfside Road 6/4/2003 Mc2ve�erit INt0-F'�'N� r nit Lane Configurations 4 + + + Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 59 78 6 61 27 190 1 118 51 249 88 31 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 64 85 7 66 29 207 1 128 55 271 96 34 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) vC, conflicting volume 1033 840 112 861 829 156 129 184 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 49 65 99 61 88 77 100 80 cM capacity (veh/h) 125 242 938 170 245 887 1450 1385 + � 6s,� rt�cttolj�,LnE�� F E��NB1BM�'��, � Volume Total 155 302 185 400 Volume Left 64 66 1 271 Volume Right 7 207 55 34 cSH 178 407 1450 1385 Volume to Capacity 0.87 0.74 0.00 0.20 Queue Length (ft) 159 148 0 18 Control Delay (s) 90.2 35.3 0.1 6.1 Lane LOS F E A A Approach Delay (s) 90.2 35.3 0.1 6.1 Approach LOS F E �}p�w y�}► u Ar m & y L�y,h. ��µfua+l+ ( 'l Efi,S x.;!�'�'yc ei Ili,'rsfa�.� l 9ii•e'�i�""'"� k' L`S- S `yP¢�+)��^'.. Intersectit�}1h}j 1i 1y Mr6 b��F L �C��5F� f Average Delay 26.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.9% ICU Level of Service C Rising Tide, Nantucket 6/4/2003 Baseline Synchro 5 Light Report 2008 Baseline Build AM Page 1 ABENDASMAL-LT51 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6: Fairgrounds Road & Scotts Way/Rugged Road x/4/2003 Movement 1=51T Is Lane Configurations ' Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 372 16 19 258 30 35 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 404 17 21 280 33 38 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right tum flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) vC, conflicting volume 422 735 413 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 98 91 94 cM capacity (veh/h) 1148 383 643 Direction; Lan `# ' y' EB 1NB N NI31 Y }r Volume Total 422 301 71 Volume Left 0 21 33 Volume Right 17 0 38 cSH 1700 1148 490 Volume to Capacity 0.25 0.02 0.14 Queue Length (ft) 0 1 13 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.7 13.6 Lane LOS A B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.7 13.6 Approach LOS B Intersection Average Delay 1.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 33.3% ICU Level of Service A Rising Tide, Nantucket 6/4/2003 Baseline Synchro 5 Light Report 2008 Baseline Build AM Page 2 ABENDASMAL-LT51 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6/4/2003 8: Fairgrounds Road & Old South Road '# � � Lane Configurations r 4 11� Sign Control Stop 291 684 Free Free Grade 0% 140 0 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 152 268 129 500 353 94 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 165 291 140 543 384 102 Pedestrians 130.5 15.9 3.2 0.0 Lane LOS Lane Width (ft) C A Approach Delay (s) 57.4 Walking Speed (ft/s) 3.2 0.0 Approach LOS F Percent Blockage 1V f1{er$e(tlonUt1r-112' {k4 Pl 1 Y?�}, � t, Right tum flare (veh) Average Delay Median type None Intersection Capacity Utilization 81.9% ICU Level of Service D Median storage veh) vC, conflicting volume 1259 435 486 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 0 53 87 cM capacity (veh/h) 163 619 1072 a� Volume Total 165 291 684 486 Volume Left 165 0 140 0 Volume Right 0 291 0 102 cSH 163 619 1072 1700 Volume to Capacity 1.01 0.47 0.13 0.29 Queue Length (ft) 200 63 11 0 Control Delay (s) 130.5 15.9 3.2 0.0 Lane LOS F C A Approach Delay (s) 57.4 3.2 0.0 Approach LOS F 1V f1{er$e(tlonUt1r-112' {k4 Pl 1 Y?�}, � t, Average Delay 17.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 81.9% ICU Level of Service D Rising Tide, Nantucket 6/4/2003 Baseline Synchro 5 Light Report 2008 Baseline Build AM Page 3 ABENDASMAL-LT51 R�v HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: South Shore Road & Surfside Road 6/4/2003 Movement EBL EBT 'EBf >1N8L. i T. ; YV�R 1\IBL, ,: * 0-T i�IBFt SBL M Lane Configurations 4 167 568 248 4+ Volume Left 87 4 307 Volume Right Sign Control 370 88 Stop cSH 37 Stop 1327 Volume to Capacity Free 2.13 0.01 Free Grade Err 0% 22 Control Delay (s) 0% 551.0 0.5 5.5 0% F 0% Volume (veh/h) 80 67 7 89 94 340 12 135 81 282 176 109 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 87 73 8 97 102 370 13 147 88 307 191 118 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right tum flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) vC, conflicting volume 1501 1124 251 1124 1140 191 310 235 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 0 53 99 0 33 56 99 77 cM capacity (veh/h) 22 155 786 95 152 848 1245 1327 Directjo% Lane:# Volume Total 167 568 248 616 Volume Left 87 97 13 307 Volume Right 8 370 88 118 cSH 37 267 1245 1327 Volume to Capacity 4.48 2.13 0.01 0.23 Queue Length (ft) Err 1067 1 22 Control Delay (s) Err 551.0 0.5 5.5 Lane LOS F F A A Approach Delay (s) Err 551.0 0.5 5.5 Approach LOS F F lntersectign , inm Average Delay 1244.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 103.9% ICU Level of Service F Rising Tide, Nantucket 6/4/2003 Baseline Synchro 5 Light Report 2008 Baseline No Build PM Page 1 ABENDASMAL-LT51 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6: Fairgrounds Road & Scotts Way/Rugged Road s/4/2003 --I. --v +_ Movemeq Lane Configurations '(H Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 430 10 10 523 10 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 467 11 11 568 11 11 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right tum flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) vC, conflicting volume 478 1063 473 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol IC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) IF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 99 96 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 1095 247 5915 A ? p l�liect 4.`, ,ane k��Yr G� Y �Y j�flJ .i . •hc �: i$ � 5 ,. J u Volume Total 478 579 22 Volume Left 0 11 11 Volume Right 11 0 11 cSH 1700 1095 349 Volume to Capacity 0.28 0.01 0.06 Queue Length (ft) 0 1 5 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.3 16.0 Lane LOS A C Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.3 16.0 Approach LOS C Average Delay 0.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 46.5% ICU Level of Service A Rising Tide, Nantucket 6/4/2003 Baseline Synchro 5 Light Report 2008 Baseline No Build PM Page 2 ABENDASMAL-LT51 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 8: Fairgrounds Road & Old South Road 6/4/2003 t .� Movement Lane Configurations Sign Control Grade Volume (veh/h) Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (veh/h) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Median storage veh) vC, conflicting volume vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol tC, single (s) 1C, 2 stage (s) 1F (s) p0 queue free % cM capacity (veh/h) Stop 0% 125 377 0.92 0.92 136 410 None 4 Free 0% 290 499 0.92 0.92 315 542 1898 725 816 6.4 6.2 4.1 3.5 3.3 2.2 0 3 61 46 423 807 Free 0% 583 168 0.92 0.92 634 183 Directions l.aaei # , ' � 4 �B 1 �B 2 IVB,1 •.,51:31 , T � �� i � z � � � �3 � }, , ` y ., "��., � 5�� Volume Total 136 410 658 816 J J Volume Left 136 0 315 0 Volume Right 0 410 0 183 cSH 46 423 807 1700 Volume to Capacity 2.94 0.97 0.39 0.48 Queue Length (ft) 367 289 47 0 Control Delay (s) 1061.9 67.5 9.0 0.0 Lane LOS F F A Approach Delay (s) 315.1 9.0 0.0 Approach LOS F 5 Interse�ior� °Summary 4 �F.rf.hl� t r� i} fieri �3 K6 i4 ✓''.' `}9' ;3 T 1^• Ta;F `F*kYy�1�.�1`y �'`��_��3i+K: Average Delay 80.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 108.0% ICU Level of Service F Rising Tide, Nantucket 6/4/2003 Baseline Synchro 5 Light Report 2008 Baseline No Build PM Page 3 ABENDASMAL-LT51 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: South Shore Road & Surfside Road 6/4/2003 674exramorSf',.. VIM Lane Configurations 172 4 252 632 4 87 99 13 322 Volume Right Sign Control 378 Stop 118 cSH Stop 244 1245 Free Volume to Capacity Free Grade 0.01 0% Queue Length (ft) Err 0% 1 24 0% Err 0% Volume (veh/h) 80 71 7 91 96 348 12 135 85 296 176 109 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 87 77 8 99 104 378 13 147 92 322 191 118 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right tum flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) vC, conflicting volume 1543 1159 251 1159 1172 193 310 239 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 0 47 99 0 27 55 99 76 cM capacity (veh/h) 17 146 786 82 143 846 1245 1322 y(�� f isr rx(• r Z 'r'rt b ,�5'z`rd,�.. < ay,.§ � � t'w' za �� Volume Total 172 582 252 632 Volume Left 87 99 13 322 Volume Right 8 378 92 118 cSH 31 244 1245 1322 Volume to Capacity 5.52 2.39 0.01 0.24 Queue Length (ft) Err 1172 1 24 Control Delay (s) Err 667.5 0.5 5.6 Lane LOS F F A A Approach Delay (s) Err 667.5 0.5 5.6 Approach LOS F F Intersection,.�7Y117m5w'a1 'x "`,9 `glEry l 7 a 9 e 't��1 a' s �a tL }`�, Average Delay 1288.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 106.1% ICU Level of Service F Rising Tide, Nantucket 6/4/2003 Baseline Synchro 5 Light Report 2008 Baseline Build PM Page 1 ABENDASMAL-LT51 `l s HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6: Fairgrounds Road & Scotts Way/Rugged Road 6/4/2003 Rising Tide, Nantucket 6/4/2003 Baseline Synchro 5 Light Report 2008 Baseline Build PM Page 2 ABENDASMAL-LT51 I IA' Movement I~8 `EBI WBS Lane Configurations Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 430 32 39 523 22 27 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 467 35 42 568 24 29 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) vC, conflicting volume 502 1138 485 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 96 89 95 cM capacity (veh/h) 1073 216 586 Dicedion, Lane Volume Total 502 611 53 Volume Left 0 42 24 Volume Right 35 0 29 cSH 1700 1073 331 Volume to Capacity 0.30 0.04 0.16 Queue Length (ft) 0 3 14 Control Delay (s) 0.0 1.1 17.9 Lane LOS A C Approach Delay (s) 0.0 1.1 17.9 Approach LOS C ice. Average Delay 1.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 72.3% ICU Level of Service C Rising Tide, Nantucket 6/4/2003 Baseline Synchro 5 Light Report 2008 Baseline Build PM Page 2 ABENDASMAL-LT51 I HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 8: Fairgrounds Road & Old South Road s/4/2o03 -,* `V 'w t Lane Configurations 421 it 824 Volume Left 140 0 Sign Control Stop Volume Right 0 421 Free Free Grade 0% 802 1700 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 129 387 308 499 583 175 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 140 421 335 542 634 190 Pedestrians y. t jT�l �+ r� r� �,t i q.H., ter .. { 4 n li b ` ° .tm �l ;a ,.0 xi .. rT:rh v �.-,+� �;. s � yc .fie .� ,yy i v✓'�x.'Pr�`iM :.y .: '� Y� t tea ��"� r aJ`�c',,� i!"`�r . t,#r f��`et7r.t+' `' axr �;'a"wj{s � •--':'.` Lane Width (ft) Average Delay Walking Speed (ft/s) Intersection Capacity Utilization 109.8% ICU Level of Service F Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) vC, conflicting volume 1941 729 824 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 0 0 58 cM capacity (veh/h) 42 421 802 + � � wF 1 f 5 n Diieriori; Lane';i�S rBv+wi �43v 7�ILD S$t f p a r J t R T A t. N F t # ti A Volume Total 140 421 877 824 Volume Left 140 0 335 0 Volume Right 0 421 0 190 cSH 42 421 802 1700 Volume to Capacity 3.38 1.00 0.42 0.48 Queue Length (ft) Err 313 52 0 Control Delay (s) Err 75.2 9.6 0.0 Lane LOS F F A Approach Delay (s) 2556.1 9.6 0.0 Approach LOS F y. t jT�l �+ r� r� �,t i q.H., ter .. { 4 n li b ` ° .tm �l ;a ,.0 xi .. rT:rh v �.-,+� �;. s � yc .fie .� ,yy i v✓'�x.'Pr�`iM :.y .: '� Y� t tea ��"� r aJ`�c',,� i!"`�r . t,#r f��`et7r.t+' `' axr �;'a"wj{s � •--':'.` q.�;/ l �`ers[iS+Y� Average Delay 637.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 109.8% ICU Level of Service F Rising Tide, Nantucket 6/4/2003 Baseline Synchro 5 Light Report 2008 Baseline Build PM Page 3 ABENDASMAL-LT51 BY HAND Nantucket Board of Appeals Town of Nantucket I East Chestnut Street Nantucket, MA 02554 Attention: Linda Williams Re: Rugged Scott LLC Comprehensive Permit Application Dear Linda: RISING TIDE DEVELOPMENT LLC 32 ARLINGTON STREET • CAMBRIDGE • MASSACHUSETTS - 02140 617.549.3232 TEL • 617.492.1143 FAX • joshposnerGattbi.com July 28, 2003 You have asked for a copy of our current pro forma. As you know, a pro forma for the project was submitted to MassHousing in January 2003 with our request for a Project Eligibility letter. A copy of that entire application along with the pro forma was given to the Selectmen at that time. In addition I made an introductory presentation on our project to the Board of Selectmen in February and answered question regarding the pro forma. Under the MassHousing program (as opposed to the New England Fund program where the ZBA has a more prominent role) MassHousing takes the primary responsibility for evaluating and monitoring the financial matters for a 40B development. An updated copy of our pro forma is attached in the same format as was submitted to MassHousing previously. A few items have changed between the time it was originally submitted in January, particularly the addition of two more Middle Income units, revised prices for affordable units, and a few changes in projected line item costs. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Rugged Road and Scotts Way Preliminary Development Budget Development Item Total Cost Per Unit Cost SITE ACQUISITION $1,683,000 $23,375 HARD COSTS Site Prep/all site development casts $2,602,000 $36,139 Landscaping $576,000 $8,000 Residential Construction $14,922,600 $207,258 Clubhouse and Pool $400,000 $5,556 Hard Cost Contingency $925,030 $12,848 TOTAL HARD COSTS $19,425,630 $269,800 SOFT COSTS Permits $185,000 $2,569 Architectural $231,000 $3,208 Engineering $140,000 $1,944 Legal $272,000 $3,778 Insurance $40,000 $556 Project Overhead/Admin. $300,000 $4,167 Constr Manager $200,000 $2,778 Property Taxes $40,000 $556 Construct. Loan Interest $841,000. $11,681 Application/Finance Fees $100,000 $1,389 Appraisal $10,000 $139 Carrying costs during development $520,000 $7,222 Accounting $15,000 $208 Marketing (market and affordable) $1,455,800 $20,219 Soft Cost Contingency $300,000 $4,167 TOTAL SOFT COSTS $4,649,800 $64,581 TOTAL DEVELOPMENT COSTS $25,758,430 $357,756 SALES REVENUE (See detailed schedule) Affordable Units (40B) $3,846,000 $213,667 avg./unit 18 units Moderate Units 0ocal) $2,761,000 $306,778 avg./unit 9 units Market -rate Units $22,930.000 $509,556 avg./unit 45 units TOTAL SALES REVENUE $29,537,000 72 units POTENTIAL PROFIT $3,778,570 Percentage Profit over TDC 14.7% Q Q oa{ 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 Q 0 0 0 �+ `7 W (O N OQO M W V IL O CO h N M st O O O O O p 0 0 0 0 O O G V 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LL N 0 a oR 0 U70 0 0 M C6 N h N N M M W r N O {- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 oomotoCO� fA i E OQ000 000000 oo0oo 000000 O O N O a.G.qtnrOf O UO a o W) eVGmWaD ) KNWWWHW N K� U H H O • V QG HOOD H ONp O O O O O O Oa0SSSO O FONUHMMo HS NAHM M M vfi ma c O O O O N O O O LL m N w (y; O- V oaey�So app a 000 N fD 1 VIS �ah�00D N O1 �ON0 FF co fDh-�f+09 49 F - o o W O� a 0 yoj 0 0 0 0 0M-L9Q �'-- NCO !9O � N o� c c y V1 � N yg 2 N On r N N E Q m 0 O mLL o �m�2 LL LL LL LL_ gg i�L U P�v»a 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0L0SS a, SSOO SSSS �NtO�pp O(0�pp s0s�� N�yQ�y00 ax(Y) >ml'�F W M hNh� N07 N CO Ostt� mN c V 0000 S S O O O 888. S H OON ACD It n N r Cl) ti MF F FNOM t0 m Q N Q SSC N ri m -mj S O O S S S S o 0 I O IDO p QOOf O) tG.G hOD 0n MMM OD Mm Q. N V► 0o00 O000 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 grah liana Cl) M M N M M N M y O S 0 800 0- o 0 0 0 gOo 0 =CyL�aC m 0x0a00 0NN0 ov NO SOS O�y COD N Os10 0 M mow m (1) in K N M N 00 0 oOpOpgo S O O 8 0 0 0 HCDCD co M W W CC a N N N N N N '�. MM NN O NM N'' CD COo N CD Co W CD m Ol M OF .� tG 6 mMM CON FMNM - Z C� rn o�voio s O LL --00 00 L00 0 •M� T N C) CN D N E Q m U 0 tm N 4CZN k of c If c m c m At m ~ LL ILL U! ''b-05 IMg —V 91 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LL N 0 a oR 0 U70 0 0 M C6 N h N N M M W r N O {- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 oomotoCO� fA i E OQ000 000000 oo0oo 000000 O O N O a.G.qtnrOf O UO a o W) eVGmWaD ) KNWWWHW N K� U H H O • V QG HOOD H ONp O O O O O O Oa0SSSO O FONUHMMo HS NAHM M M vfi ma c O O O O N O O O LL m N w (y; O- V oaey�So app a 000 N fD 1 VIS �ah�00D N O1 �ON0 FF co fDh-�f+09 49 F - o o W O� a 0 yoj 0 0 0 0 0M-L9Q �'-- NCO !9O � N o� c c y V1 � N yg 2 N On r N N E Q m 0 O mLL o �m�2 LL LL LL LL_ gg i�L U P�v»a OUTLINE ZBA PRESENTATION New Housing at Rugged Road and Scotts Way Rising Tide Development July 31, 2003 Overview-- Development Team. Review of topics to be covered. Background Nantucket Housing Needs Balancing: a) Maximum Affordable Housing—Recent report's objective of 400 ownership and 200 rental units over next 7-10 years b) Design and Density with Nantucket in Mind- In keeping with island's character; appropriate location c) Economic Feasibility with no Government Funds—Risk, Fair Return, Regulated Profit Limitation Site Characteristics a) "Town" district in Comprehensive Plan b) Border of Higher Density and Lower Density Zoning Districts c) Water and Sewer d) Shuttle bus e) Close to Schools and shopping f) No wetlands g) Traffic -accessible from multiple directions Description of the Development Program a) 56 residential buildings and community building. 16 two -families; 40 singles; 72 units b) Quirky street pattern c) Small homes with different styles; HDC commentary; more building types coming d) Zero lot lines for duplexes making all homes on fee -simple single families— lot sizes 2500 to 7500. Average 5000. e) Three price levels: Low/Moderate; Middle; Market f) Permanent Affordability—Administered by Nantucket Housing Office and subject to Nantucket Housing Needs Covenant; Local preference g) Restrictive Covenants like Naushop, Nashaquissett, Witherspoon, etc. requiring quality standards regarding landscaping maintenance, future changes, parking, streets, lights, and sidewalks, noise, preservation of high quality neighborhood. h) Value of mixed affordable and market -rate housing Rising Tide Development ZBA Presentation July 31, 2003 Page 2 Density a) Review neighboring zoning districts b) Naushop and Nashaquissett c) Sconset and Town d) Compass Rose e) Across Rugged Road: 4 units/acre; across Fairgrounds: 8 units/acre; Electric Company site 1 block away: 16 units/ acre. Compass Rose proposal: 14 units/acre; Compass Rose settlement: 7 units/ acre. Our proposal: 7 units/ acre Lots of Preliminary Reviews and Discussion a) Informal discussions since Fall `02—community leaders and'elected officials b) Followed the Somerset proposal and its withdrawal with interest c) Neighbors—met with multiple neighbors, open to further meetings and discussions d) Selectmen- Public presentation in February; recent letter to ZBA e) Two Sessions with Town Departmental Coordinated Review- one in April, one in July f) Fire Chief- street pattern and driveway widths, hydrant locations g) Police- parking lin4tations and street lighting h) Water Co.- full review and receipt of letter i) Sewer/ DPW- thorough discussion and basic understanding of plan; current sewer dispute with DEP j) HDC- preliminary review; advisory role worked out; further consultation k) Planning Board-- Peer review on Engineering 1) Planning Board --Traffic Study and peer review m) Archaeology n) Environmental-- Coming soon: MEPA, Natural Heritage program, met with Land Council o) Design Comments: Community Building; off street parking not in front of house; widen driveways for Fire; one side parking for police; limitation on rentals and prohibition on employee dormitory style housing; more building types Project Build -out a) Modular b) Phasing infrastructure and home construction Overview of Project Economics a) Role of MassHousing under Housing Starts Program versus ZBA role with New England Fund b) Project Costs c) Home Prices Rising Tide Development ZBA Presentation July 31, 2003 Page 3 d) Cost of Affordable Homes exceeds Sales Price= Loss e) Market Homes make up for this Loss f) Margin A Necessary Conversation for Nantucket: Some Myths and Realities Architectural and Site Design—Chris Dallmus, Design Associates Engineering—Dan Mulloy, Cullinan Engineering Legal—Arthur I. Reade, Esq. q4=tCULLINAN C CIVIL ENGINEERING SURVEYING • TRANSPORTATION DESIGN AUBURN BOSTON • LAKEVILLE October 9, 2003 CEC No. 2023127-00 Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Nantucket 1 East Chestnut Street Nantucket, MA 02554 Subject: Rugged Scott LLC 40B Application Response to Public Comments Nantucket Land Council — Mainstream Engineering Dear Members of the Board: Cullinan has reviewed the comment letter from Tom Sexton of Mainstream Engineering dated July 30, 2003, regarding the Comprehensive Permit Application by Rugged Scott LLC. We have prepared the following response narrative for your review and confirmation. The narrative has been prepared to follow the order of the Mainstream Engineering letter. Our project is in compliance with the State statute for aquifer protection. a. The Public Wellhead Recharge District regulation does not prohibit residential uses in underlying districts. The Comprehensive Permit Application requests that the requirement for 80,000 square -foot lots be altered to allow for the proposed development plan. In addition, the local zoning requirements do not state the required lot sizes were created to protect groundwater resources. There are numerous properties within the recharge district at a closer proximity to Town wells that are zoned for 5,000 square -foot lots. b. The proposed drainage system has been reviewed and approved by the Wannacomet Water Company, attached letter dated 7/9/03. The Water Company is required under zoning section §139-12B(3)(a) to review drainage systems for projects within the Public Well Recharge District. The proposed drainage system is equivalent to multiple systems approved by the Nantucket Planning Board throughout the Public Well Recharge District. 2. Approximate locations of septic systems and wells on abutting properties will be added to the plans. The stormwater infiltration systems will maintain required setback distances to abutting septic systems and wells. There are no buildings proposed within 10 -feet in any direction of the infiltration systems. 3. Soils. We have reviewed available soils information as provided by the National Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) as well as our own files for soil investigations we performed at the Nantucket Electric property. All record Lakeville Corporate Park SO Riverside Drive, Lakeville, MA 02347 P:508-946-9911 F:508-946-9955 W w w. c u l I i n a n e n g, c o m {�.'?piojt.Gt ','1G?;3 27-CICiDaclt4:nc ;;o�u?rik-M1:1�ias'Ir6r?rn I do(, Page 2 of 4 CEC No. 2023127-00 October 9, 2003 information indicates that soils within and around the site are very well draining sands. In addition, the existing drainage system for Seikinnow Way, directly opposite this site on Rugged Road, utilizes an infiltration basin and leaching pits to dispose of stormwater runoff. However, prior to final design of any infiltration systems we will conduct on-site soils investigations to confirm our assumptions. We will ask the Nantucket Board of Health to observe the on-site soils investigations to confirm our findings. Ground Water. We have reviewed record information related to groundwater table elevations within and around this site. Our review consisted of referring to the Town of Nantucket Water Resources Protection Plan as well as our own groundwater investigations performed at the Nantucket Electric property. The Town plan indicates a groundwater elevation of 10.0 and our investigation at the nearby Nantucket Electric property indicated an elevation of approximately 7.5. Utilizing an elevation of 10.0 would result in the groundwater table being located approximately 20 -feet below existing grade on the site. A 20 -foot depth to groundwater will allow for,greater then a 4 -foot separation between the infiltration system and the high groundwater elevation. Design. The proposed infiltration system is designed according to standard engineering practice as well as methods that are commonly utilized and accepted by the Nantucket Planning Board. Final design of these system will be based upon the requirements of the Nantucket Planning Board regulations as well as the Department of Environmental Protection Stormwater Management Policy. 4. Missing in Mainstream letter. 5. We disagree. The project is proposed to be connected to the public sewer system. Connection to this system will remove the potential of any nitrogen contamination of the groundwater supply. Nitrogen loading studies are prepared for sites that consist of on-site septic systems and expansive lawn areas. This site will utilize public sewer and will not consist of large lawn areas that would contribute excessive amounts of nitrogen through the application of fertilizers. A nitrogen loading analysis was not requested during the review and approval of the Nantucket Electric property. 6. The proposed stormwater infiltration systems are designed to intercept, clean, and infiltrate all runoff produced from the development on-site and are in compliance with the cited regulation. Individual lot grading will be indicated within the final construction plans for the project. 7. The proposed drainage system has been reviewed and approved by the Wannacomet Water Company, attached letter dated 7/9/03. The Water Company is required under zoning section §139-12B(3)(a) to review drainage systems for projects within the Public Well Recharge District. The proposed drainage system is equivalent to multiple systems approved by the Nantucket Planning Board throughout the Public Well Recharge District. We will review the potential for utilizing alternative "open" drainage systems for a portion of the stormwater during preparation of final construction plans for the project once the final site plan has been {': 1projectsy2023127-0U`1Do(,.1_1 dOr Page 3 of 4 CEC No. 2023127-00 October 9, 2003 resolved. We will evaluate the feasibility of placing some open infiltration within the right-of-ways along Rugged Road and Scotts Way although this will have other impacts on sight lines and a visual buffer. The ability to use swales will be limited due to the level slope throughout the site. In addition, we will review the potential use of alternative stormwater treatment systems such as the Stormceptor and Vortechnics units. 8. We disagree. The use of roof drain drywells is not sensible for a project of this type. Dry -wells require a setback distance of 10 -feet from foundations. In addition, the land area they would require would limit the ability to provide additional site landscaping and screening. The roadway drainage system is designed to accommodate runoff from roof areas. 9. We agree that a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit is required for this project. The NPDES permit is issued by the DEP and the EPA. The purpose of this permit is to control sediment transport and erosion during construction activities. However, applicants are not required to obtain this permit until such time as they are ready to commence construction activities. The final construction plans for the project will contain necessary erosion and sediment control measures. Preparation of this permit application prior to approval is not a requirement of the Nantucket Planning Board. 10. The plan set submitted with the Comprehensive Permit Application contains an existing plan. This plan is equivalent to the Site Analysis Map required within the Planning Board regulations. The applicant has publicly acknowledged that the site will be subject to review by the Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program and that Natural Heritage will evaluate the need to conduct bio -surveys to determine the potential presence of rare and endangered species, therefore we see no need to modify the plan to include such a statement. 11. The use of secondary containment of pressure sewer lines is not a regulatory requirement. The Town of Nantucket municipal sewer system contains numerous gravity and pressure sewer lines, none of which to our knowledge contain any form of secondary containment. The DEP requires that sewer lines constructed within water resource protection areas be pressure tested to insure water tightness. The DEP would make testing the sewer infrastructure a condition in any approvals given for a sewer line extension. 12. We will review the need for a greater roadway cross -slope during preparation of final construction plans. We will note that the Nantucket Planning Board regulations require a minimum cross -slope of 2% on paved roadways and 4% on gravel roadways. Final construction plans will comply with these standards at a minimum. 13. We agree that the gravel and shell drives will become less pervious over time due to traffic loading and compaction. However, to consider gravel and shell drives as impervious as asphalt is extremely conservative. The NRCS developed methods (TR -55 and TR -20) of calculating stormwater runoff based on extensive research and testing of surface treatment materials. The method consists of assigning a rating, G `:project „0? 3127-00\Doc'.t_andCOLIObI-tvl ainstrelrn I doc Page 4 of 4 CEC No. 2023127-00 October 9, 2003 curve numbers, to individual surface treatments to determine the amount of runoff. This system is in wide use throughout the country and has been utilized and approved on multiple projects throughout Nantucket. We would note that the NRCS utilized gravel areas as partially pervious in their design of a constructed stormwater pocket wetland on Washington Street Extension in Nantucket. 14. Existing topography does not indicate that any substantial amounts of abutting properties will drain onto the site. The site and surrounding properties are very flat and therefore not conducive to direct stormwater onto adjacent properties. The proposed drainage system is designed based upon conservative assumptions and has sufficient excess capacity to accommodate any unforeseen conditions. Also, a more detailed analysis of the drainage system and surrounding watersheds will be performed during the preparation of final construction drawings. 15. Guest parking will only be allowed to occur within designated areas of driveways and along portions of the roadways. Parking on lawn areas will be prohibited as part of the restrictive covenants and regulations to be agreed to by all home buyers and enforced by the howneowner's association. Roadway areas are considered impervious as they are paved while gravel surfaces are considered partially pervious. See 13 above. 16. Extensive applications of fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides is not anticipated. The lots will not be provided with large lawn areas that would yield such applications. The preparation of an Integrated Pest Management and Nutrient Management Plan is not necessary or required for this type of project. These types of plans are prepared for high intensity uses such as golf courses. However, the applicant is willing to investigate the feasibility of including certain restrictions regarding fertilizer use and pest control as a potential restrictive covenant. Also, the applicant will review the possibility of utilizing a single company to apply these products chemicals if they become necessary. If you have any questions or comments please call me at (508) 946-9911. Very truly yours, Cul ' an Engineering Co., Inc. a . Mul oy, PE. Senior Project Engineer Attachments cc: Josh Posner - Rising Tide Development, LLC. Arthur Reade - Reade, Gullicksen, Hanley & Gifford, LLP Linda Williams - Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals Andrew Vorce — Nantucket Planning Board Richard A. Claytor, Jr., PE. - Horsley & Witten, Inc. MAW G�1�7ipjet.t�:�•.2v^^<t3127-pQ1i�Oci!_andC nuns i)-Mainstrea,ml dvc RHEND RSSOCIRTES ID:7812733053 OCT 10'03 11:31 No.006 P.02 Abend Associates Traffic &Transportation Planning services 6 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM From: Michael R. Abend Yate: October 10, 2003 SUBJECT- RESPONSE TO MANW. PWR RLwww COMMENTS RISINo TIDE, WisinnNTIAL DNvvi,ovmi+.N7' RUGGED ROAD, NANTUCKET, MASSAC.HIlm,'17s INTfiQ1aUCT10N This memorandum provides a response to the comments raised by Rizzo Associates on behalf of the town of Nantucket in their peer review of our original trat'(ie impactassessment. Specifically, the documents referenced are the Abend Associates' 'Technical Memorandum dated July 10, 2003 entitled Traffic Impact Assessment, Rising Tide Residential Development, Rugged Road, Nantucket, Mapsaehusetts aid the letter from Ri7.zo to the NPEDC dated October 2, 2003 entitled Pger Review-- Traffic Imact Anallylk. Rago-4 Road and Scotts Way 40D Housing Proidet. Nantucket Massachu, setts. 'This response generally follows the comments listed in the Rizzo letter in the order in which they were raised. It is important to .note that in the introduction of the letter, Rizzo notes that the conclusions and the analysis, in general, are appropriate and consistent with professional engineering practices. They have asked for additional information related to safety, sight distances, and queuing and suggest a higher level of mitigation. These Issues are covered in the responses below: R --VIEW QIP JL&IINICAI.AN&YSIS Rizzo Associates confirmed that tho study area, ansa ysts hours, exMipg lrgfrw data, future no build trgf a 1101uhtes, project trip generation, project trip dWribution, future ballet'. -a i volumes, and the capacity analysis were all done appropriately grid c�n�islent with standard practice. The areas in which they had specific comments are listed below: Safety Analysis — Rizzo agreed that the safety analysis (i.e., accident history) was appropriate but noted that the data for 2001 was now available and requested that information. This is attached. There were three accidents along Fairgrounds Road in 2001, two at Old South Road and one at Surfside Road. The two accidents at Old South Road were rear -end collisions 265 Winn Street, I $uriirlgton, M88880USOUS 01803 2616 (781) 273.3383 FAX 273203 .ABEND ASSOCIATES ID:7812733053 OCT 10'03 11:32 No.006 P.03 Response to C'otnments, Naratickut, MA October 10, 2003 •2. involving vehicles traveling northbound an Old South Road, one involved personal injury at midnight and the other on a Saturday evening in the summer, The accident at Surfside Road occurred at 11:00 PM on a night in November and did not involve personal injury. This data does not change the original conclusions of the report. Sight Distances Analysis — No specific sight distance analysis was provided for the intersections of (rugged Road at Fairgrounds Road or Scotts Way at Fairground Road. The reason for this is that these intersections represent existing locations that were not proposed to be modified as a result of this project. It was noted in our study that "Fairgrounds Road has a passing zone through both intersections, evidence that. the roadway is flat And straight with excellent. visibility." For these two rcason9 no formal sight distance analysis was done at these locations. The visibility required for passing is far greater (by a factor of four) than the visibility required for Stopping Sight Distances. 'Thus, it js reasonable to conclude that visibility at these intersections is adequate. Our recommendations to install intersection ahead signs approaching these intersection was an acknowledgement oi'the fact that drivers who might be passing another vehicle need to he reminded that there are side streets along this section and to watch for entering vehicles as they consider whether it is safe to pass. To the extent that visibility for vehicles exiting Rugged Road or Scotts Way is limited by overgrown vegetation, the Applicant is prepared to assist in trimming back vegetation in the right—of--way. It should be noted that the planned installation of a bike path along Fairgrounds Road should reduce the vegetation issue. Queue Length Summary — The queue lengths at the study area intersections were included as part of the calculations in the appendix to the report but was not organized/summarized for reviewers. A queuing swnmary is attached to this memorandum. Mitigation — Rizzo concurs that the installation ol'stop signs and stop lines on Rugged Road and on Scotts Way at their intersections with fairgrounds Road and the construction of bikeways along Scotts Ways and Rugged Road are Appropriate mitigating measures. At this point, the applicant wants to include in the mitigation proposal the clearing of vegetation on the canners of the Fairgrounds Road intersections at Rugged Riad and Scotts Way to enhance sight lines for traffic exiting these roads. However, Rizzo also believes that additional measures should be considered. Abend Associates RBEND RSSOCIRTES ID:7812733053 Kcsperosc to Com?uents, NaMuckct. MA Octobor 10, 2003 .3 - OCT 10'03 11:33 No.006 P.04 1, lnxtoll a bus stop/shelter on Fairgrounds !toad. We concur that this would bo an appropriate measure and the applicant is prepured to discuss funding this item as part of the preparation of an overall mitigation plan for the project.. The applicant bus discussed the possibility of, and the issues relating to, installing a bus shelter with NKTA at its existing bus stop on the westerly side of Fairgrounds Road, opposite Rugged Road. 2. in the event that the fine Lands subdivision does not move forward and provide mitigal.lon at Fairgrounds Road/Old South Road, this applicant should provide those improvements or make a comparuble payment into a traffic mitigation field The applicant is prepared to u►nsider this recommendation as part of the overall mitigation plan for the project. 'lite applicant is presently collecting cost information Mating to the construction of a right turn lane at Fairgrounds. Road and Old South !toad. 3. The exact limits of the bikeways and sidewalks should be clear prior to the approval, We concur with this recommendation. S1TECLAS Comments on the site plans are being addressed by the site engineer, Cullinan Engineering, 20319•R0AJ%1nVv,Nnn1txkc1 ^ Abend Assoclates ABEND ASSOCIATES ID:7812733053 z z OCT 10'03 11:33 No.006 P.05 Abend Associates RBEND RSSOCIRTES ID:7812733053 OCT 10'03 11:33 No.006 P.06 Abend Associates VOL AU UJ Uc:1Jp October 10, 2003 CERTIFIED MAIL Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals 1 East Chestnut Street Nantucicet, MA 02554 5Ud-'/59-0013 p.c AN ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS COLLABORATIVE Re: Rugged Scott LLC Comprehensive Permit Application [LEC Fi1cH:RTD103-125.01] Rugged Road and Scotts Way Nantucket, Massachusetts Dear Members of the Board: LEC Environmental Consultants, Inc., (LEC) has been retained by Rising'f ide Development to review the proposed housing development on the ten -acre site located between Rugged Road and Scotts Way, east of Fairgrounds Round. According; to the Massachusetts Natural Heritage Atlas for Eastern MBSSaChUSCUS (I I Edition, July 1, 2003) produced by the NatUnd Heritage & Endangered Species Program (NHESP), the site is not located within an Estimated Habitat for Rare Wildlife, but does occur within a Priority Habitat of Rare Species (PH 1737). PH 1737 extends throughout a large majority of the island and indicates the approximate extent of rare species habitat based on records in the NHESP database, but does not necessarily designate significant habitat to a specific geographic location. LEC reeopiizes the potential for state listed species to be present on the site and is currently working on a Protocol for a Habitat Suitability and Endangered Species Study to be approved by NHESP. LEC will worl< with NHESP staff to concentrate a study targeting* the state listed species potentially utilizing or existing; within the site. The Applicant, Rising Tide Development, has tal<en a pro -active approach to effectively determine whether rare plant and animal species are present on the ten -acre site. Once LEC's study has been performed, the results will be forwarded to NHESP for their review. Should any rare species be discovered, the Applicant will worl< with i NESP to cooperatively mitigate and/or avoid potential impacts to rare plant and animal species located on or adjacent to the site. Should yuu have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact LEC at 508- 759-0050, Following please find a copy of LEC's Statement of Qualifications. Sincerely, LES onmental Consultants, Inc. T'aul R. Lelito Executive Director of Ecological Services cc: Risings Tide Development LEC Environmental 107 i:UJUUO!t ROc10, auilding ;!, Suite: 11 G 3 Ua,, Park Ur,ar - Consultants, Inc. Wakoti,:ki, MA 011138o 00u,-11:, h',A /8? -d.15-^;1011 ';il •� 1.•w-7 ii'.::; (1 Ci4f :1ChUol'18 '.!;!) iMI nolyhleeK+decanvu0nn1an1^i.cen� sau'i'i:c:c:;..b;cenvironr,•c•n'„I ce;ri www.lecenvironnlental.corr, wi^rv.lecrnvironmental.umt Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Nantucket 1 East Chestnut Street Nantucket, MA 02554 RIstme TIDE DEVELOPMENT LLC 32 ARLINGTON STREET • CAMBRIDGE • MASSACHUSETTS • 02140 617.549.3232 TEL • 617.492.1143 FAX • josh posnerOattbl.com October 21, 2003 Dear Chairman Sanford and Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals: You have asked for additional material regarding the Preliminary Development Budget submitted to you on July 28, 2003. As I explained at a previous hearing of the ZBA, the format used for that financial submission follows the one requested by MassHousing in their Housing Starts Program and submitted to MassHousing in January 2002. I hope the following information is helpful in providing further detail on the assumptions used in preparation of that budget. Estimates are based on a variety of sources depending on the individual line item. In general, financial projections at this stage of planning are based on comparable experience, industry standards, and some degree of research. We have tried to present this information in a way that will be helpful in separating fixed and variable costs. HARD COSTS 1. Site Prep/ all site development costs: a. Common Infrastructure— @ $1,420,000 Includes: Site clearance; construction of internal site roadways; underground utilities (water, sewer, electric, storm water management and underground infiltration); sidewalks; bike paths; Scotts Way road cogst action. Based on preliminary contractor pricing. b. House Lot related— @ $15,000 per unit. Includes: Foundation hole; Driveway; Walk; Utility connection. 2. Landscape: Plantings and Hardscape @ $8,000 per unit. 3. Residential Construction- Assumptions used in estimating the cost of individual housing units was provided in the financial tables previously submitted. The estimate includes: building foundation; modular house delivered to site and placed on foundation; on-site completion and utility connections; finishes; kitchens including basic appliance package; unfinished basement. 4. Clubhouse and Pool- Allowance @ $400,000. 5. Hard Cost Contingency @ 5% of Hard Costs. SOFT COSTS 6. Permits: Construction permit costs estimated @ 1% of cost, (including building permits, connection fees, review fees, etc.) (We are requesting a waiver of permit fees for the affordable units.) 7. Architectural: Includes basic unit design and coordination with Modular Home Builder; Landscape design. 8. Engineering: Includes civil, planning, and survey. 9. Legal: Includes permitting, real estate closings, contracts, and financial for the project, plus $1000 per unit closing costs. (Does not include potential appeals or litigation.) 10. Insurance: Estimate through unit sales. 11. Project Overhead/Administration: Modest allowance per MassHousing program covering period from project initiation through unit sales and warranty period. 12. Construction Manager: Oversight and coordination of construction during construction period. 13. Property Taxes: Estimate from construction start through unit sales. 14. Construction Loan Interest: Assumes 24 month period from construction start through completion with site infrastructure and homes built in phases. Because of modular construction process, nearly entire construction loan is for site infrastructure and soft costs. 15. Application/ Finance Fees: Acquisition and Construction Financing Fees. 16. Appraisal: Estimate. 17. Carrying Costs during Development: Includes financing costs, insurance and real estate taxes for land purchase beginning with acquisition (June 2002) through construction start estimated at late 2004, plus additional costs for site maintenance and operations during construction. 18. Accounting: Cost accounting at end of project. 19. Marketing —Commissions at 6% covering both market rate and affordable units. 20. Soft Cost Contingency: Approximately 10% of non- marketing expenses. HOME SALES PRICES 21. Affordable Unit Prices: See attached schedule showing price calculation for Moderate Income (40B eligible) and Middle Income (NHNC) units. 22. Market Unit Prices: Based on comparable sales data. Please feel free to contact me with any questions. I look forward to working with you on this project. If enclosures X30 ��° a 3 � IJ � � a �+°02 � �� aaQ °/''g3 va 3 d W a= m 2.1 .. �, -n Pg V 0 � C Y o n. ° y 7 S N m d m a aco 49 IOU 4A�► w g P 900 fA '('nom ° m (� tD s n c O� CODA (OD000 (OOACA1tCD X W L =W CL to (s+ St p fP (A OD V :q OND 9DU1�lt 'O O I W W a a O tD N W K) " to (A n ())0 X� A V A O(A V -� V 0-00 � (OD N V O (n O Gr O Z? W A 0) (A Ja 0 0) (D (O Cn C O j 0 Cl 7 a;49 y o = •* -N+ 49 C3 EA QA-0� ILI3 O (m coZA OD -:,4 V OD OD CA Cp pE W OD W W K3 EA EA FA A W 0 CD O O O O (A V -+ V (D — OD O W N- y Cn O CN Oa OA OCnAO 0)0w(A 3pp, ONOO = C CL 0 iA H! PI)yW� -w � _( 4A 40 4w W)1 �W 49 �f0(T0 WO co W W O (D (+l — W � 4940 0) 0) A Co 3 V A V a(A VA VOV(D WNNOCA (D O OO Off? AA AO -►O (nNODO OW 00 = N S CL a� 49 40 + .1 J aWV 4+sw� 3 0)A (D ��m cD0to fA Av0OCWm CT m CST WO XO N) O 0..,. -4 OV0 OD W 0 C S OA00 W CL 69 69 69 Ci =Wa 0 O NOD J V WN(A 40 N) co V om_U 0 O oW+WEA W Cil - 4 0) -O OaNO��W OOOA O SCD 49 469 40 O = 3Na VtCT 669040 N(D ZAco W ODW CD000 40 W N w co O A W O A O O W 0 0 0 0 CL 2 ap CL CD -� 49 to EA 40 S. ;a w fA J J 49 4949 �O •J NCNO N N W �8 WO N mN O co O OD 0 CO 4A 0) co b, 3 N (D N W o;o m m m cn dna'"nbn��-rDr(n =fid aavram()tnra D a mob 3 a a.tw �' v �' �,� �� o m c� v y e 5'm a� � m y 0m �,•� m m o D r � o m�� My OID cv.y y y �' =' �'0 c 3 a,A�DD i 3 m CO) no a Von Zt o'� �i �c i Z'm m C �— '0a O4mmmy1lOk?� (Ooh (i— wm, Z CDy g W O m W �' v z m CD W < y •y+ O (D 3 W00 m 0 v1 3 3 vys m QUO C� vw r c M mmo ZVW �;a to z D 69 to 69 69 69 .M ZR A 6969 6�9�A63w ��oo04 aC ppp >0a UI ODy�N��_ N ODCT 69 85T000000 W z 0 z OO OI CT CT CT (170000 000000000 -100 W CT 0 C)00000T 0000 CT W 000000000 C 0000 OOOOOOOO000 a om o00000000 n1Co � 1:cocncn vvv vvvv vv 0D0(0v o ovvv c gv g m �m m m c� m� m cru m coo a m 0 W� m m Si 5i ai ai aiai DD CD m O y C C C C C C C C C C C y y (// Z 0vvv r.K �r:r:r...r.r.r:2rm' 2 m C m m m m n o �.(OD 0' m =v Oa m m c c O ro r`D cvc v Dm CD C NCD CD - - 7 m 7 m 8^ CD m m m Z y N 0 X X N N^ O O O O (D o a Qm�8m a a a m 0 0 0o:rv_.0v_.m O > > 46 oD �CD CD m a; � vO, ro m (O m v m 0 a > > mum �� m 3 (7 > 47 0 N Mm ;w —°—O CD CD m (D °—' d ca Q D D D m m z m V O m0,m CT AAA m W W NN V mmmCTCTA A W W NN m �N CA OCA NCD O SON ODA NwAOONto OONCAA 1 O m fA N to N`N+ 0O(p C�mOO VOLA OCTIA O 'Con, j(Oa W V V7 CO NCT OD G7 CbO W p 000 VmCTA 0 W NCO C) 00 V O ?W h3 M— 0MM 0Ncom D� p O p O70DON 0) co D 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m r co W W < N.�� ..a �� CT O OD 00 V V C>OO UI Cn Ul m A W O C11 V7 cA CnM V V V V o w ao oD O p p N N N N N N N N N N N N N C, p O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O m 69 69 69 to 69168 *99 to 4 40 499 40 Ul P69 69O W�OOCO OoOOA W -+ O AAAW W OW www CVJ7NN�� NWO WOom COm N(O� V W(O p CTWOODO pWOOCT W OOD aD M_OV-+VO VAC.0 O O O O NW�000 CO VC007 O OCD �ypa VOD fO OD -+O W V V CO W 00D O -40W-40 W W CO OVODO v 69 fA 69 69 69 69 -EA 69 69 69 69 69 to tA6q ��qq yy�� yy 6yp� CA) N3 V_ON)A ANO OD ZDC)A W tHtA49fA��69 ( AAAA AOo tOWA OOmQD COp� V A - C4 4w 4 00 WOOD fT NfOO�COD (Ag CTN03 m W Nm CT �ODA— � CJI OOCTtA 0000 CTOCTO ?WWOtD-CA N V?'co A- 00000 0000 0000 U14M N0 OD W ONO -+N y 00000 0000 0000. (O CTW CO CA CA 0 N N V VCO CT y g 00000 O O O O O O O O Z o Dpi z ppN :� 0 C m F3 m READE, GULLICKSEN, HANLEY & GIFFORD, LLP SIX YOUNG'S WAY NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554 ARTHUR I. READE, JR., P.C. KENNETH A. GULLICKSEN MARIANNE HANLEY WHITNEY A. GIFFORD (508) 228-3128 FAX: (508) 228-5630 November 12, 2003 Nantucket Board of Appeals 1 East Chestnut Street Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 MAILING ADDRESS POST OFFICE BOX 2669 NANTUCKET, MASS. 02584 Re: Rugged Scott LLC Comprehensive Permit Application Dear Board Members: As counsel to the applicant, I am writing in response to the letter from Peter R. Fenn, Esquire, dated October 30, 2003, which was submitted to the Board by the Nantucket Land Council, Inc. We concur with Mr. Fenn that the comprehensive permit process does not exempt the applicant from compliance with applicable state -mandated requirements as to wellhead protection. Under 310 CMR 22.21(2)(a), various uses are prohibited.in Zone II and some Zone IIIareasof a wellhead. None of these uses are proposed in connection with the subject application. 310 CMR 22.21(2)(b) prohibits various other uses in these Zone II and Zone III areas unless designed in accordance with specified performance standards. The only such uses which are proposed by the applicant are, under item 5, storage of liquid petroleum products (namely, home heating oil, which will be in above -ground tanks complying with the performance standards set forth therein), and, under Item 7, uses which will render impervious more than 150 or 2,500 square feet of any parcel (as to which a system for artificial recharge of precipitation will be provided that will not result in the degradation of groundwater quality, complying with the applicable performance standard specified in Item 7). Accordingly, the project will comply with all of the wellhead protection requirements established under applicable state regulations. Under 310CMR 22.03(7), the violation of any local zoning or nonzoning control that is a requirement of an approved wellhead protection plan is prohibited. The only such applicable requirement in Nantucket is Nantucket Zoning By-law §139-12.B, which establishes the Public Wellhead Recharge District, an READE, GULLICKSEN, HANLEY & GIFFORD, LLP Nantucket Board of Appeals November 12, 2003 Page Two overlay district in which the applicant's project is situated. In this overlay district, uses prohibited or restricted under 310 CMR 22.21(2), with some elaborations and extensions, are generally prohibited or restricted as a matter of local zoning regulation. Nothing in §139-12.B prohibits the uses which the applicant proposes, however. The only relevant restriction is the requirement, similar to that imposed by 310 CMR 22.21(2)(b)7, that land uses which result in rendering impervious more than 150 or 2,500 square feet of any lot must be accompanied by the provision of a system for artificial recharge of precipitation that will not result in the degradation of groundwater quality. As noted above, the applicant proposes a system for artificial recharge of precipitation, which will conform to the requirements of all state and local regulations. Accordingly, the applicant does not require and is not requesting an exception from the provisions of By-law §139-12.B, and plans to comply with all presently -existing state and local requirements as to the protection of ground water and the wellhead protection zones. In summary, we agree with the position taken in Mr. Fenn's letter that the Board of Appeals does not have the authority, in the comprehensive permit process, to override state requirements as to wellhead protection, nor to grant exceptions from local wellhead regulations mandated by the Commonwealth. However, this is not relevant to the applicant's project, which seeks no such overrides nor exceptions. Sincerely, Arthur I. Reade, Jr. air@readelaw.com AIR/iry CC: Mr. Joshua Posner Rising Tide Development LLC 32 Arlington Street Cambridge, Massachusetts 02140 Peter R. Fenn, Esquire Peter R. Fenn & Associates 71 South Street Jamaica Plain, Massachusetts 02130 F:\WP0PQ\P0sner\ZBA03LTR.doc BY HAND Nantucket Board of Appeals Town of Nantucket 1 East Chestnut Street Nantucket, MA 02554 Attention: Linda Williams, Administrator Re: Rugged Scott LLC Comprehensive Permit Application Dear Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals: RISING TIDE DEVELOPMENT LLC 32 ARLINGTON STREET • CAMBRIDGE 617,549.3232 TEL • 617,492.1143 rAx November 18, 2003 chf)) MASSACHUSETTS • 02140 • joshposnerOaltbi.com At the last hearing the ZBA stated that it would make a decision about whether to suspend consideration of our permit application until the issue of potential requirements of the State Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program (NHESP) is resolved. We would like to repeat our position on this matter. We do not believe that a decision to suspend the hearing is justified or consistent with the way other applicants in similar circumstances have been treated by Nantucket boards. In addition we do not believe that such a decision is in keeping with the 40B law and its regulations. We would like to remind the ZBA that other projects have been subject to the State NHESP and have proceeded through the local approval process before NHESP issues have been resolved. The Nantucket Electric Company's Pine Lands subdivision project received a letter from NHESP requiring environmental surveys during the pendency of the application for subdivision approval by the Planning Board. Satisfaction of the future requirements of NHESP was listed as a condition of final approval by the Planning Board. (See Attachment 1. Copy of NHESP letter.) The Sherburne Commons project received local approvals even though it is subject to the requirements of NHESP and has received a letter detailing a series of rare of endangered plants to be surveyed. It is our understanding that this study is currently underway. (See Attachment 2. Copy of NHESP letter.) On October 3, 2003 the ZBA requested the advice of the Planning Board regarding state environmental permits and received a clear response that in their opinion (voted unanimously) the ZBA should proceed with processing our permit application and make the satisfaction of NHESP requirements a condition of final approval and issuance of a building permit. (See Attachment 3. Copy of excerpt from October 27, 2003 Planning Board memo to the ZBA.) Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals November 18, 2003 Page 2 We are unaware of the local review of any project being delayed until NHESP issues are concluded. We have begun the process of working with NHESP. We have engaged the services of a professional environmental consultant experienced in the NHESP process. Our consultant has conducted a site evaluation, has communicated with NHESP regarding his findings and has requested that NHESP inform us of information that they may have and how they would like us to proceed. ( See Attachment 4. Correspondence regarding Rugged Scott LLC and NHESP.) We feel strongly that the appropriate way to deal with the State NHESP requirement is same way it has been dealt with in other applications, namely that it be made a condition that must be satisfied prior to final approval and construction. Furthermore, the NHESP process is mandated by state law, and is not a local approval subject to the comprehensive permit process. Therefore, it does not come within the ,jurisdiction of the ZBA in the present proceeding. However, if the ZBA decides to suspend consideration of our permit application, despite the recommendation of the Planning Board, we should like to state the following for the record. We would assert that the public hearing on our permit be considered to have ended and that the Board proceed with the deliberation period and then issue its decision on our permit application. We believe that there is no further information that you need or have requested of us, and that therefore you have the information you need in order to make a decision on our permit application. The deliberation period can take up to 40 days as prescribed in the 40B red=ulations. We would be willing to meet with the Board during that time period to discuss conditions for a permit that might be mutually acceptable. We are making this request in accordance with the process for closing a hearing suggested by the decision of the Housing Appeals Committee in the case of Transformations, Inc. v. Toivnsend Bo(md ofAppeals dated September 23, 2002. There is no additional information that we are required to present to the ZBA. Further, the Board has not requested any additional information from us, and in our view it does not require any additional information in order to render its decision. It has been nearly 7 months since April, when we filed our permit application containing all of the required information and supporting documents. One of the reasons why our application was so complete was that prior to filing, at the request of ZBA staff, we had met with all relevant Town officials and Boards and incorporated many of their suggestions into our plans. Because of the completeness of our application the Board has only made one minor request for additional information since our original submission, namely a memo providing additional information on the underlying assumptions of our pro forma, which we submitted a few weeks after the request was made. The Board did request advice on a range of topics from the Planning Board on October 3, and the Planning Board by unanimous vote issued a thorough report addressing all the ZBA issues on October 27. This report was discussed fully at the October 30 ZBA hearing. Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals November 18, 2003 Page 3 We have been cooperative in previous Board requests for our consent to time extensions. We were asked and agreed to extend the beginning of the public hearing on our application until July 30, 2003, 60 days beyond the legally required deadline for holding the first hearing. We also accommodated a ZBA request that the second hearing be held September 25, 2003, rather than the 30 day prescribed time period. At this point however, in the event that the ZBA decides to suspend its hearing for what could be a year or longer awaiting NHESP information, we will not consent to a further time extension. At the hearing held on October 30, the ZBA requested the applicant and the neighborhood group called "Nantucket Land Watch" to meet before the next hearing date in order to discuss possible resolution of issues affecting the project. We have been seeking such a meeting for months. Such a meeting was scheduled for November 1-8, and we met with a group of neighbors and their counsel. Counsel for the neighbors began the meeting by informing us that they would support a conventional market -rate project, but were inalterably opposed to any project on the property which would be done under Chapter 40B. We were prepared to discuss issues raised by the Planning Board recommendation and discussed at the ZBA hearing, with the hope that some common ground could be reached, but the group present at the meeting declined any such discussion of details of the project. Unfortunately, this means that there is no apparent means of reaching a resolution with this group. This, of course, does not mean that we are unwilling or unable to discuss the matter with neighbors who are willing to work cooperatively to resolve issues. The owners of one abutting residential property have expressed their support for the project. Another adjacent lot has recently been proposed for the site of the Lighthouse School. We have had contacts with the School representatives and hope to have productive talks. If the ZBA decides that it wishes to proceed with the hearing and the consideration of our application, we are prepared to continue with ZBA hearings for a limited amount of additional time in hopes of working with the Board, individual neighbors and other interested parties to find a mutually acceptable resolution. Attachments F:\WpOPQ\Posner\ZBA letter re NHESP final 11.17.03.doc ��;A.. .►Jr tic W'f:'tiP .7.�.•k1.kfY t_Iy,Y,JK. i4 Y166Ul........T6Ua)Jaz-�-rr-r COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS HOUSING APPEALS COMMITTEE } TRANSFORMATIONS, INC., ) Appellant ) TOWNSEND BOARD OF APPEALS, ) Appcilea ) No. 02-I4 RULING ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT I. INTRODUCTION In May 2001, Trans£onnatiOns, Inc. filed an application, with the Townund Zoning Board of Appeals for a Comprehensive Pcmit pursuant to Gj_ a. 40H, §§ 20.23 to build affordable housing finmecd under the New En8land Fund of the Fcderel Home Loan Sank of Boston, The developer proposed to build 44 singlo-family homes on a shitty -arse site on Highland Sheri in Townsend.' A.Rer a lengthy h,earittg, the Board dcnied the cvmprehcnsiva permit, and the dcvetWer appealed to tha Housing Appeals Committee'. After the hearing before tbo Committee commenced with;k Confera►xee of Coweei, but bcforo the first evidentiary sessign was conducted, the developers filtd a motion for summaty judgment and for a ruling that the compcabensive permit had beets constructively gra W Invcst ut to G.I.. I. TIC Currant proposal is for 41 units, of which twelve are to bei &Mrdabl4 to low- or modcrete. incozAe &utilles. -��. •• .n.in � 'Inn1 'i 'inn 1111rJJLGGJ 1L: G4 t01LOZ)1Lo1 KUbbLLL IAIYIYtK .' •.-w .�. 6d VLA IIT;Yl� J.I.. Yi twMIl.. .Y,Jh. #i::�.7U1.• -IV IT �T rT I 2 e. 40B, § 21 becauee the BoaW had hilcd to render a decision within forty days of tarnination of the public hendng(. 11te Committee-becatase it is an adutinisbcative body charged conducting hearings in an cxpeditiona manner to facilitate the development of aitbrdable housing normally discorsragcs parties, from engaging in pre -hearing sparring through motions, But the tecWkal nature of the gtwstion pn seuted haze and the opportunity of providing clarification which may perhaps be useful in future cases are sufficient reasons to rule upon the motion, now, gather than holding the question in abeyance for consideration after a full hearing on the merits. 11, DISCUSSION Transforinatian5, Inc. filed its appli4mtlon with the Board on May 25, 2001. lite Board opened its hearing on Junes 20, 2001, and considered the application in twenty-one separate sessions hold at regular intervals through May 30, 2W2.2 11h_ developer argues that that the hearing was closed on March 13, 2002, The Hoard maintains that the March and April sessious were continued hearing sessions, and that the hearing was not closed until 2, the exact chronology of the hearing is as follows: June 20, 2001 hearing Opened March 13 — contested session July 19 — hearing session March. 27 — contester[ seaAion August 1 bearing session April 17 — contP,rb`xcd session September 19 —heariagsession .April 24 - contested session October 3 — hearing session May B — deliberative session Novmbet 7 hearing session May 15 — deINTative session December 12 - hearing session May 22 - delibarative session Unary 2, 2402— hearing session May 2$ . delibmwive sesainn January 16 — hearing session May 29 — delibctative session January 30 -- heating scasion May 30 deliberative session February 13 — hearing session June t — decision filed Y'HUG G3J GO .-.VIII "nti 11 "nn iI ice/ �UJ 1G. U4 f Ot 41j1j1 4111 fCUJJCLL I HIYIYGfC f Hl7C U4/ ri C) u, uc u't: ,t rp i. C:. BENTLEY, JR- & WSSOC, t�Utjl as � 3ff /-� N, o 3 April 24, 2002, with six pwely deliberative sessions following in May. Affidavits were filet With the Committee reflecting the partiea conflicting positions. The parties agree that a decision. dated May 30 denying the compmbcnsivo permit was filed with the town cictk on lune 1. If the hearing did not end until .A,pril 24, this June filing is two days beforo tho expiration ofthe statutotily mandated forty -day period and the decicion was rendered timely. ('The developer's appeal to the Housing Appeals Co=ittee was filed on June 19, 2002. The timeliuoss of that appeal, which is dependent on the date on which notice of the decisi4m was given to the developer as required by 760 CMR 30.06(8), has not been challenged.) There is little question about when hearings end as a legal -natter. "public hearin,ga end when the right of inwestod prudes to present infomation and argue is cut off-... Requests by members of fixe board... for specific items [that involve only uncontested facts sad prewnt no opportunity for either party to persuade or contradict do] not extend the hearing.- if asking a question during the course of a hearing in and of itself kept open a hear wbich was otherwise concluded, it would be a simple matter to keep bearings opc n indefirdtely and to frustrate the streamlined procedure...." Milton Comman.t.,tssoc, v. Board 4fAppeals ofMilton,14 Maas.App.CL 111, 115, 436N.E.2d 1236, 115, 1239 (1982). But when hearings become prolonged, determining when the hearing ends as a ihctual matter can be more difficult. 1ta such cases, although both careful consideration by the Board and forbearance by the developer are to bo encouraged, it is particularly important that the parties address procedural -natters with precision. Neither appears to have done so hetc, It appears likely that the contested session in Marcia apd April 2002 included both deliberation and information gathering activities, and neither party made a clear record of the procedural posture of the matter, I Cl/ 4CIU-1 -LZ- U4 t of zoolzol KUS�tLL I hil Vl`ICK +r. . v� %j;; -r 4N .j, a„. n L n 1 LIT, JK. & rraauL.• t'JVP! Jv-r „-r.•� In general, it would appear that the best ptactice if a developot believes that the hearing has ended is to request a notation in the board's mirratet or to otherwise make a written record to remove atl ambiguity.' Theft, if it desires or feels obliged to take advantage of the constructive gratnt provision In Q.L. 4013, § 2k, it should do so promptly. it can count forty days, and then file it request for relief either with this Coa unitti:O or a court. But if it attcrnpts to have its cake and eat it too by waiting in the hope that the Board may issue a favorable decision, it may well hear the Board argue that it has sun afoul of the provision in ¢ 21 that per7rtttits the time limit to be extended by mutual agrotment of the parties. In this case, despite having met regularly to consider alto developer's ,application, the Board appears to have continued this hearing far longer than it should have, 41Sjtretchiug hearings over $ix m,o.ntlts was something less than a fast tM* process." Milton CGfnwans Assoc- v_ Board of Appeals ofht•Ilton, 14 Mass.App.Ct. 111, 115, 436 RE, 2d 1236, 115, 1239 (1982). But the developer was also anwise in not taking prompt action to clarify the procedural posnue of the hearing when the Board failed to do so. 3. 1f the Board does not agree that the hearing should be tenni hated, b its incumbent upon the developer to seek some other avenue of relief. The Suprrme Judicial Court has commented that "the date (of the Inst hearing sas stonj may be even easier if the beard of appeals has not comduoted the public hearing expeditiously ...... .Pheammt .,?lags Asooe. v. J'awn of Burlington, 399 Mass. 771, 506 N,E_24 1152, 783, 1160 (1987). Cleoly, the dovelopor must have amine recourse If the local hearing is noedlessly protracted. The statute offers no guidance, and while Supreme ludieial Court perhaps implies that A permit may be constructively graatod evm while the Board Is still receiving new information, a mote Cautious approach is also, Available. Whga the local hearins bas been unduly protracted, this Committee will enten&W an appeal on the theory that the permit bas been constructively dented. d. Though the law requiring the constmetive $rant of a comprehensive pe Ait is clear, the mechanics of issuing such a p rrntit etc lass so. Because of the meaty complex policy issues involved in tate construction of affordable housing, the best approach for eithertltc Coffilt]lttoc or a Court may well be to doelare that aueh a permit for the m mbar of unfits proposed. by the developer hes ismed, but to then eonduot an abbreviated evidentiary inquiry to dotetmilna what conditions should bo impoW to pmtect local planning and environmental concerns. —f V V r• ..Inn - i Inns 'I Inn CONCLUSION ,AND ORDER 1 c wwt, find on the basis of unoontosted ftcts both that there was no meaningful hOUWS on April 24.2002 and that there W been no mukol apmwent between the pw dies to extend the heating and time for rendering a deoision. The Motion for Summary ludgmcm is denied, and the parties are hereby 014WW to PTOMW with the bearing on tbo merits a5 scheduled, beginning September 27, 2002. Housing Appeals Ceauntuee Dated! September 23, 2oo2 (Aj e Wemer Lehr, Chairman Presiding Offiw LMI M3 _ 271 E N V,,j. R, O"N M. E N'i:A 1 ":S'Y. S' -T `E`M S Cr:O k'4?A"8'O-RA�T./`Y E:' October 10, 2003 CERTIFIED MAIL Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals 1 East Chestnut Street Nantucket, MA 02554 Re: Rugged Scott LLC Comprehensive Permit Application [LEC Filcg:RTD\03-1?>.01) Rugged Road and Scotts Way Nantucket, Massachusetts Dear Members of the Board: LEC Environmental Consultants, Inc., (LEC) ltas been retained by Rising Tide Development to review the proposed housing development on the ten -acre site located between Rugged Road and Scotts Way, east of Fairgrounds Round. According to the Massachusetts Natural Heritage Atlas for Eastern. Massachusetts (11 ' Edition, July 1, 2003) produced by the Natut<d Heritage & Endangered Species Program (NHESP), the site is not located within an Estimated Habitat for Rare Wildlife, bill does occur within a Priority i-labitat of Rare Species (PH 1737). PH 1737 extends throughout a large majority of the island and indicates the approximate extent of rare species habitat based on records in the NHESP database, but does not necessarily designate significant habitat to a specific geographic location. LEC recognizes the potential for state listed species to be present on the site and is Currently working on a Protocol for a Habitat Suitability and Endangered Species Study to be approved by NH ESP. LEC will work with NHESP staff to coucentrate a study targeting the state listed species potenlially uolizino or existing -,vithin the site. The Applicant, itisinu `fide Development, has taken a pro -active approach to eftectively detennine whethe, rare plant and animal species are present on the ten -acre site. Once LFC's swdy has been performed, the results will he tbrwarded to NHESP for their review. Should any rare species be discovered, the .applicant will wort( with NHESP to cooperatively mitigate and/or avoid potential impacts to rare plant and animal species located on or adjacent to the site. Should you have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact LEC at 508- 759-0050. Following please find a copy of LEC's Statement of Qualifications. Sincerely, LEC. ' onmental Consultants, Inc. Paul R. Lelito Executive Director of Ecological Services cc: Risint! Tide Development LEC Environmental consultants, Inc. 100 „uqutuxt RU' d, St ilding P. Suite 1 ! 0 hVa'reti:al;. MA 011340 !6'.-0,15-='.:101!'31 ��•'�:,.3:,"r ii �;;,) noRlt Inc c: qcc:?nv ir�ru ltr_nt: l.con i wmv.teeenvi ronment al, con; S Oti_: Perk Ur, t. Coe: no, MA U:r;ich °iU5 :4f! ;1CS:1 :�llu !'.}t):)1:i f1•,... au'i1:cC�'I•sacn:�ir�nrtt�n'.:I co:;i Y1'1"�`i�/.Ir Cfh nl�l.'Orlrllefl111.f'.�)nt October 20, 2003 Facsimile (original sent Ce•tificd Mail) A•.N.;;1 Environmental Review Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program MA Division of Fisheries & Wildlife Route 135 Westborough, MA 0 15 81 Re: Rare Wildlife Information Request Rugged Road and Scotts Way Nantucket, Massachusetts 'fo Wholn ft Ma.y Conceal: (LGC Filuil:RTD\03-125.011 LEC Em iroamental Consultants, Inc., (LEC) would like to request any information on state protected rare species in the vicinity of the I I -acre parcel located between Rugged Road and Scotts Way on Nantucket, Massachusetts. The property is not located within all Estimated Habitat for Rare Wildlife, but does occur within a Priority Habitat of Rare Species (PH 1737) that extends throughout a majority of the Nannlekcl island. At this time, the Project Proponent, Rising Tide Development LLC, is evaluating the property for a 40B Affordable Housing development. Enclosed is the Rare Species Information Request Form and copies of the USGS Topographical Map (Nantucket Quad), the MA NHESP Priority Habitat. of Rare Species Map (Nantucket Quad), and the Fslimated Habitats of Rare Wildlife and Certified Vernal Pools Map (Nantucket Quad) depicting the location o1 -the property between Rugged Road and Scotts',\ray. Thant: you For your- lSSiSt1_l1lCC in this matter. Should YOU have any questions of require additional intonnalion. please do not hesitate to contact LEC at 508-759-0050. Sincerely, LEC Environmental Consultants, Inc. Brian T. Madden Wetland Specialist LEC Environmental Consultants, Inc. 107 Audubon Road, Building 2, Suite 110 Wakefield, MA 01880 781-245.250() 731-245-6677 (Fax) rwrth i ec(ci,le c e n v iron mc: nt a 1. c o n i www,lecenvironmental.com 3 Otis Park Drive Bourne, MA 02532 500-759-0050 508-759-0013 (Fux) SoulhlecV#Ir:cenv ironmei ual.com www, lecenvironment al.com Commonvvealth of Massachusetts ATTACHMENT 1 t_ = , . F,qt YFos eir�e% 'O'"ildlife Wayne F. MacCallum,'Director 20 December 2002 Bob Durand, Secretary Executive Office of Environmental Affairs Attention: MEPA Office Arthur Pugsley, EOEA No. 12915 251 Causeway St., Suite 900 Boston, Massachusetts 02114 Project Name: Pine Lands Drive Subdivision Proponent: Nantucket Electric Location: Fairgrounds Road Document Reviewed: Environmental Notification Form NHESP File Number: 02-11315 Dear Secretary Durand, N The Nlatural Heritage & Endangered Species Program (NHESP) of the NIA Division of Fisheries & Wildlife has reviewed the Environmental Notification Form for the proposed Pine Lands Drive Subdivision and would like to offer the following comments regarding impacts to state -protected rare species. "File proponent incorrectly completed the Rare Species sections of the EI T- The project does meet one of the rare species review thresholds in that "take" of state -protected species would likely occur, the site falls within a `Priority Site of Rare Species Habitat" and the project site is two or more acres. Based on the information submitted with the E -NF, the proposed 57 -lot Pine Lands Drive Subdivision may "take" state - protected species,aip ocularly rarz.tnoths Lpd Nantucket Sh_adbush (,lnlelanchiel-nantucketensis) under the MA Endangered Species Act (G.L. c.131 A) and its implementing regulations (321 CMR 10.00). Take, in reference to animals, means to `harass, harm, pursue, hunt; shoot, hound, kill, trap, capture, collect, process, disrupt the nesting_ breeding, feeding or migratory activity or attempt to engage in any such conduct, or to assist such conduct; and in reference to plants, means to collect, pick; transplant, cut or process or attempt to engage or to assist in any such conduct." We recommend that the proponent survey the site for rare moths and the Nantucket Shadbush, as well as assess the site for suitable habitat for the rare saecies listed on the a-tachment titled "Rare Species on Nantucket Island." Comprehensive surveys for rare animals and plant should occur in areas of suitable habitat. Survey protocols should be submitted to NHESP for approval, and be prepared by qualified individuals. The NHESP requests that the rare species survey results and attendant impact analysis are presented in a Draft Environmental impact Report. The proponent should clearly show how they have avoided, minimized, and mitigated impacts to rare plants and animals to the greatest extent practicable by submitting a Conservation Permit application package according to the guidelines we have provided to them. We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this project. Sincerel SQ —7 x/St tricia Huckery NHESP Itnd �ered Species Project Analyst Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program Field Headquarters, Westborough, MA 01581 Tel: (508) 792-7270, ext 200 Fax: (508) 792-7821 wAn Agency of the Department of Fisheries, Wildlife & Environmental Law Enforcement hrtp:/iw1,N mus.t„ ildlije.nro 07:23/2003 15.37 FAX SOS 228 7252 Conserrattoti Commission A/ Commonwealth of Massachusetts Wayne F. MacCallum, Director July 10, 2003 William R. Maher, P.E. Judith Nitsch Engineering, Inc. 186 Lincoln Street Suite 200 Boston, MA 02I11-2403 Re: Sherburne Commons, Nantucket Massachusetts Endangered Species Act (M.G.L. c131 A) NHESP-File #6341885 „ -' ' Drar Mr. Maher, ATTACHMENT 2 2002 gut 22 2003 :w Thank you for contacting the Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Prop -am (NHESP) for information regarding state -protected rare species in the vicinity of the above referenced site. According to our database, the Nantucket Shadbush (,4melanehier mmnic'cere)sis), a state -listed rare plant, has been documented to occur on the project site for Sherburne Commons. The Nantucket Shadbush is listed as "Special Concern" pursuant to the Massachusetts Endangered Species Act (M.G.L. e_131A). Other tare species that have been found new the project site include Bushy Rockrose (Reitanthemum dumosum), New IrnglaudBlaring Star (Liat-is scanosa var. novae-angliae), Creeping St. John's wort (Hypericum adpressum) and the Eastern Silvery Aster (Symphyotrichum cor(color). The NHESP is concemW- that development of this project site, may constitute a "take *% as defined in the Massachusetts Endangered Species Act (MESA) and its Regulations (321 CZAR 10.02), Regulations 32I CMR 10.02 establish niles and prohibitions regarding activities which "take" Endangered, Threatened, and S?ecial Concern species native to Massachusetts. A "take" is defined as eolleetirng, picking, killing, transplar:ting, cutting, or processing of a plant- please note that all state-listed'species are protected from "take" under MESA. In order to dsterniinc whether a review of this project unser the Massachusetts Endangered Species Act (MESA) is required, the NHESF requests that a botanical survey for Nantucket Shadbusn be conducted of this project site.. It is important that a qualified botanist conduct the field survey in accordance with the attached NRESP SuncxProtocol- The-Ni�7ESP recommends that the botanist be on the lookout during the field survey for any of the other rare species listed above that have been documented in nearby areas. Please subunit the results of the botanical survey and any future development prams for this property to NHESP for revitw. If you have any questions about this letter please call Nancy Putnam (cxt. 306). Sincerely, Thomas W. French Assistant Director cc --41 ,f -9dnjucket Conservation Commission A Y 4 Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program Route 135, Wesoomugh, MA (11581 Tel: (508)'792-72M x 200 Fay: (508) 792--7821 Ar Agency of the Uepartmeat of Fisheries, Wildlife & En%ironmentat Law Eniomemetit http:Awww•statc.ma.usldfwelti4fw/nhm 1-d qn2i.-AR2-Anq suet T T tM • -t eput-1 dFi :Fn Fn Fn ion ATTACHMENT 3 Excerpt from Report of Nantucket Planning Board dated October 27, 2003 in response to Zoning Board of Appeals memo dated October 3, 2003. "Environmental impact study/Endangered Species/Fish and Wildlife" Applications for State and/or Federal permits occur independently from local review. The Planning Board considers its own rules, regulations and judgment in approving or denying an application.. Most permitting proceeds in this manner with the local review boards completing their process first. If further permitting is necessary, it is the applicant's responsibility to pursue. If the subsequent State or Federal permit is denied the project cannot move forward. If on-site changes are required, the applicant must re- open the plan for modifications. If off-site mitigation is allowed, it is the applicant and the State/Federal agency's responsibility to develop implementation. The point here is that there is only speculation about the existence of rare and/or endangered plants or moths present at this site. All of the above "If' scenarios are possible and have occurred at recent projects reviewed by the Planning Board including the Nantucket Golf Club (off-site mitigation), Sherburne Commons (study), Pinelands (study with examination of alternatives). The only condition ever required by the Planning Board related to the conclusion of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is in regard to Pinelands, which was a voluntary agreement not to clear the site any further until the completion of the study. The Planning Board would encourage a similar commitment here. We recommend that the Zoning Board proceed with a review of the local issues regarding this project. ,V&7 November 5, 2003 CERTIFIED MAIL Pat I-Iuckery Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program MA Division of Fisheries & Wildlife Route 135 Westborough, MA 01551 Re: Rare Wildlife Information Request Rugged Road and Scotts Way Nantucket, Massachusetts Dear Ms. Iluckery: g ATTACHMENT 4 On October 20, 2003, LEC Environmental Consultants, Inc., (LEC) requested information on specific, state - protected rare species in the vicinity ofan I 1 -acre parcel located between Ringed Road and ticon; Wiy on Nantucket, Massachusetts (see USGS Topographic Map, Nantucket Quad). While the property is not located within an Estimated Habitat for Rare Wildlife, it does occur within a Priority Habitat of Rare Species (PH 1737) that extends throughout a majority of the Nantucket island. Since the ori<ginal request letter, LEC has conducted a site evaluation on October 22, 2003, to describe general habitat cover types. The relatively flat, rectangular parcel is dominated by a partially open canopy of pitch pine (Pinu.ti ri,icicr), with pitch pine shrubs dominating the undcrstory. The tindctstory is also Occupied by patches and individuals ot'bayherry (Al) -ricer penal Ivalrica), black huckleberry (GuYltrssac in hncc uiu), southern arrowwood (1/iht.rI'll /till dcnrcriunt), and black cherry (Pr11111IS S0,01in(t). Small patches and scattered indiN icluals of scrub oak (Qucrcrl.c iliciiilli(r) arc intet:Spersed throu«ilout the propertV. l_uwbush hltieI)CI-1 • ( I (;, c 0111110 un,(�Vr.sli/ulirurr), bearberry ("11'ClostuphYlus Omer -ural), little blucsterll (.S"thL(Ic'Ill vwIII/ scop(uriunr).'Ind Pennsylvania sed e (Cnrcr.r pen. vhurriccrj dominate the -roundcover in most Open areas. More recently, LLC has obtained an aerial photograph produced by ('ol-fast, Inc., elated April 13. ?003. 1 he photograph depicts recent development directly adjacent to the 1 1 -acre parcel. Enclosed is a copv of' the contact print (1 ":350' _) and an enlargement ( I ":100' f) of the aerial photograph. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Should you have any questions or require additional li ornlatiort, please do not hesitate to contact LEC at 508-759-0050. Sincerely, LEC Environmental Consultants, Consultants, Inc. Brian T. Madden Wetland Specialist cc: Rising; Ticle Development LLC LEC Environmental 107 Audubon Rc;tcl, Bukiinj '::;te 1 'i' hi> Park f) i; Consultants, Inc. Wakefield, MA 01'880 t:: o-ime, MA 0:1'; 781-245-2500 781-245_,3(-;77 (Far.) _`8-750-0051; northlecC?Iec<nvirnnrnc-ntal.corn south -c. E'k•cc� ;��.: �. ,,•;'• w Dec 10 03 01:40p Rising Tide Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Nantucket 1 East Chestnut Street Nantucket, MA 02554 6174921143 p.2 �I RISING TIDE DEVELOPMENT LLC 32 ARLINGTON STREET - CAMORIOGr . MASSAcmSMs - 02140 617,519.3232 TEL - 617.492.1143 FAX - j0Shp0Snef*3ttbi.e0rn December 9, 2003 Dear Chairman Sanford and Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals: On October 21, 2003 I wrote providing additional information in connection with the Preliminary Development Budget submitted on July 28, 2003. At the last ZBA hearing on November 20, 2003 certain members asked for further information related to the source of estimates for residential building construction and site development costs, as well as my comments on a financial model prepared by Ed Marchant. Source of Construction Estimates Estimated construction costs for general site development and individual houses are } based on comparative cost information and our best judgment. Attached is a two-page chart entitled "Supplementary Cost Information" (Attachment 1) containing information on site development and residential construction costs. The first page of the chart shows the components of our site development budget including construction of roadways and site drainage, installation of water mains, the sewer collection and pumping system, installation of electric, telephone, cable, and fire alarm systems, and paving. The second page provides information on the estimate for residential construction. As was shown on the July 28, 2003 pro forma, this estimate is based on a range of costs per square foot for different building types ranging from $125 for the largest affordable unit type to $145 for the smallest market rate unit type. Given the unit mix in our pro forma, this results in an average cost across all unit types of $136 per square foot. This estimate was selected at an earlier stage of unit design prior to our original presentation to the Board of Selectmen and the submission of our initial application and pro forma to MassHousing a year ago. We have looked more closely to these casts in recent months and, at this point, are concerned that projected building construction estimates may be too low. The chart breaks down elements of the residential construction cost estimate for three "Sample Unit Types" including the costs of the modular home delivered on -island and set on its foundation on the site, as well as the other costs to turn it into a finished home. These items include the so-called "buttoning -up" of the building with utility connections, roof work, and other items, plus the costs of foundation construction, stairs and decks, and any other extras such as wood floors, and special tile. As you will note, the projected cost of these sample units exceeds the square footage costs currently in use in our pro forma. A letter from Atlantic Homes (Attachment 2) with whom we have engaged in Dec 10 03 01:40p Rising Tide 6174921143 p.3 Nantucket ZBA Letter December 9, 2003 Page 2 preliminary pricing discussions is attached and provides additional information on our cost estimates. We are still hopeful that we can achieve the budget goals in our pro forma as we move toward greater design efficiency and project clarity, and we are not proposing to change the estimate in our pro forma at this time, however, we are concerned that our residential construction pricing may be somewhat low. Response to Marchant's Financial Model We have studied the financial model prepared by Ed Marchant dated November 20, 2003. It attempts to show the financial impact of different development sizes and densities ranging from 72 units, as proposed, to 24 units by calculating averages for various elements of development cost and sales prices. The model then creates a series of hypothetical estimates of development costs, revenues and profit margins. Like all financial models, it is based on many assumptions. The following section discusses the most important assumptions used in Marchant's analysis. The key assumptions fall into two primary categories. 1. By far the largest impact comes from the use of significantly higher sales prices. 2. Of secondary but still significant importance is a series of assumptions classifying both hard and soft costs as either fixed (meaning that the cost does not vary with the number of units developed) or variable (meaning the cost varies in direct proportion with the number of units.) } Sales Prices. The most important assumption in Marchant's model is the sales price on market units. The model assumes that these units can be sold at considerably more than our pro forma. To simplify the financial analysis the model assumes all units are the same average size starting with the average in our proposal of 1520 square feet. (Total SF of proposed development: 109,440 divided by 72 units = 1520.) The model then assumes that average market prices are $550,000, or an average of $362 per square feet. On a square foot basis our market rate prices range from $325 to $305, averaging $313. The use of averages for unit sizes and prices tends to obscure the actual impact of the assumed price increase on particular units. For example, if this assumption is applied to the most common unit type in our proposal-- Cottage Type A, a 2200 square foot detached home-- the result is a sales price of $796,000, or about 18% more than our projected sales price of $675,000. We do not believe this increase is reasonable or supportable. Other unit types would see similar unrealistic increases. Our prices have been set based on comparable sales in relation to the specific unit types in our proposal. These prices must reflect not only what a given unit might sell for in an existing, established neighborhood, but also a number of factors because this is a new development. For example, our prices reflect the fact that we will need to sell many units over a relatively limited period of time and the fact that buyers will be living in the immediate vicinity of construction for a significant amount of time while the community is developed and units are built. In addition there is uncertainty involved in buyer perceptions in relation to a mixed income community with some amount of affordable housing, something that must be reflected in somewhat lower prices. As a result, in order to attract buyers, our prices must be a reasonable amount below prices for units with similar sizes and amenities in established neighborhoods. Dec 10 03 01:40p Rising Tide 6174921143 p.4 Nantucket ZBA Letter December 9, 2003 Page 3 Another example is illustrative. There was some discussion at the last ZBA hearing about a recent sale of a unit in a duplex building on Witherspoon Drive at what seemed to be the surprising level of $570,000. Some ZBA members felt that this was evidence that our pro forma prices could be increased. We disagree. That unit is comparable in size to the market unit in our pro forma (Two Family A-1) listed at $480,000. While the Witherspoon example is interesting, it is important to remember that it sold at a higher level than other comparables would have indicated and might not be repeated in an environment where there is a greater supply of similar units for sale. In addition, the Witherspoon area is nearly completed and is now established as a high quality location. Finally, our units must be priced attractively below comparables in established areas. In that light, our price is not out of line.. Simply increasing sales price per square foot to $362 is not something we can accept. While we certainly hope that our prices are attractive, we will need them to be so in order for this development to be successful. They are far from "Iow ball" prices, and it will take a strong and successful development effort to achieve them. Attachment 3 is a letter prepared earlier this year from The Maury People regarding our proposed prices along with some comparable sales. We believe we have been fair in projecting reasonable sales prices. As a final note, it is worth pointing out that the pro forma sales prices for market rate units in Compass Rose approved by the ZBA in 2001 ranged from $295,000 to $349,000 for what I believe are 1600 to 1900 square foot detached singles. That works out to just under $185 per foot. Our proposed prices are 700/a higher than that. I realize that this was over two years ago, but prices have not increased much if at all in this time period. In fact approving Compass Rose at this level has provided some margin of error that has allowed it to ride out delays and other bumps in the road. Artificially and unfairly increasing the market rate prices on our development pro forma in an attempt to make a case that a reduction in the size of project will have no financial impact is not something I can agree with or support. In addition, the Marchant model increases prices on moderate income units on the basis that these higher prices can fit within the Nantucket Housing Needs Covenant fomula. There are two problems with this thinking. First, there are many people who have incomes too high to qualify for the 40B units, but not high enough to afford market rate homes. The more we raise moderate prices, the more we again create a class of people who are caught in the middle, not earning enough to afford a moderate unit, but too much to qualify for the lower priced one. Second, the NHNC formula is based on interest rates which could rise forcing maximum prices lower. If prices are assumed to be at the very top of the allowable eligibility "window" the pool of eligible buyers can be too small and the constraints on resale can be too limited. While the impact on development economics of charging higher moderate unit prices is not great, I believe it has a negative impact on the affordability of the program. Development Costs—Fixed, not Variable Costs. The Marchant assumptions on development costs have a lesser but still significant impact on the financial analysis in the model. Attachment 4 entitled "Comments on Ed Marchant's Financial Model" provides line -by-line comments on the development costs assumptions. The issues with the Dec 10 03 01:41p Rising Tide 6174921143 p.5 Nantucket ZBA Letter December 9, 2003 Page 4 largest impact relate to Carrying Costs During Development and Site Prep/ Site Development Costs, both of which are assumed to be variable costs in the model, but in fact are primarily fixed costs. I have had a phone conversation with Ed Marchant on this topic and I believe he agrees with my points and may adjust his model accordingly. The carrying cost item relates to the fact that we have acquired the site and are paying interest on the acquisition cost. Our carrying cost assumption is based on permitting being completed and construction beginning at the end of 2004, something that is a less reasonable assumption at this juncture than it was last Spring when we made it. If time delays extend construction start beyond that point, these carrying costs will go up beyond the pro forma estimate. These are fixed costs and do not relate to the decision about how many units are approved and constructed. For other comments on the modeI's assumptions please refer to Attachment 4. Items that are particularly at risk of being higher than the pro forma. While we have done our best to estimate likely costs, there are other items that are particularly uncertain and could well increase beyond the levels assumed in our pro forma. I have already discussed the residential construction line item. In addition, site costs are notoriously expensive on Nantucket and subject to rapid escalation. Landscaping will be critical to the success of the project and the $8000 allowance may not be sufficient to accomplish all the objectives. As discussed above, carrying costs can increase significantly if the approval is dragged out through long appeals. In addition our legal cost estimate does not assume litigation and appeals. The septic situation is problematic at the present time and additional costs may be involved in its resolution. It may be necessary to include costs of off-site environmental mitigation depending on the results of whatever species studies are required. These are just some of the cost uncertainties we face. A Pro Forma is a Balancing Act Any pro forma involves balancing many variables. It is not possible to know with certainty what costs will ultimately be, what sales prices will be, how Iong it will take to receive all the necessary permits, how quickly buyers will be interested in purchasing units, and how long it will take to get the project built. One way of thinking about the reasonableness of a pro forma is to ask what is the risk that costs or prices will be higher or lower than the current projection, and what is the potential return for taking that risk? I believe our proposed pro forma has struck a fair balance taken as a whole. Particularly at a time when we face concerns about construction costs and project delays, I cannot simply assume that there is some "good news" from theoretical price increases, but ignore the downward impact of potential "bad news." A Revised Version of the Marchant Model I have included in this package two revised versions of the Marchant model to illustrate the impact of our assumptions on the projected profit margin at various theoretical development sizes. According to the assumptions in Marchant's financial model, there seems to be plenty of room to reduce the size of the project without harming Dec 10 03 01:41p Rising Tide 6174921143 p.6 Nantucket ZBA Letter December 9, 2003 Page 5 its economic performance. However, if the assumptions revert back to those in our pro forma as I have argued in this letter, projected profits quickly become problematic. REVISION A (Attachment 5a) shows the impact of changing Marchant's sales prices to the pro forma levels we have proposed, but keeping development costs at the levels in his model. As you can see, the impact on profit margin of this change alone is dramatic. For example, a hypothetical 52 unit project has a projected profit margin of less than 8% and is nearly 60% or $2 million less than our pro forma. Since this version does not properly change incorrect cost assumptions, it overestimates the profitability of this scenario. REVISION B (Attachment 5b) makes the cost adjustments listed in the line -by- line comments. As it shows, profitability begins at the same level projected in our pro forma and declines from there. In a hypothetical development of 56 units profitability dips below 10%; at 40 units the project loses money. It should be noted that most experts believe that a developer profit of 15% is necessary for economic viability. The total development fee or projected profit may seem high to lay people, but there is no guarantee that it can be achieved. At this point we have invested about $2 million in land acquisition and other development costs, and face many years before a return on this investment is possible. Where Do We Go From Here I hope that this financial discussion about the project has been useful for the ZBA members. I do not believe that it will provide a clear solution to the difficult job you have in ruling on our application, however. I cannot agree with the assumptions in the model that purport to show that a significant reduction in project size results in a project that is just as strong as the one I have proposed. However, as I have said repeatedly, I am willing to consider a revised project if it would be acceptable to all parties, particularly if such a revision can avoid a long appeal process. I believe that rather than looking for a solution by unreasonably changing the financial assumptions driving project economics, the ZBA should look at the project from the standpoint of acceptable site design and planning. If you come to the conclusion that a development of reasonable density is likely to be permitted at some point in this location, I hope you will then move on to an attempt to find a plan that strikes the right balance between three goals: • the critical need for affordable housing, • a design and density that is consistent with other successful and attractive Nantucket residential communities, and • the legitimate concerns of neighbors. In this regard, I would like to ask the ZBA two questions of my own: 1. If a density of seven units per acre was an acceptable compromise to all parties including abutters in the case of Compass Rose, on a site far away from the nearest higher density zoning district and with many more immediate abutters, why is 72 units on our 10 acre site (ie. 7 units per Dec 10 03 01:42p Rising Tide 6174921143 p.7 Nantucket ZBA Letter December 9, 2003 Page 6 acre) considered "too dense?" It should be noted that the ZBA approved a 36 unit project or nine units per acre. 2. If a small lot subdivision of some sort will likely be approved for this site, why not approve it at a level that creates the most affordable housing within a reasonable site plan and density? As I have said before, I am prepared to discuss a range of ideas to find a mutually acceptable plan, including some of the revisions raised by the Planning Board in its October memo. I was disappointed that when a meeting was finally held with a group of abutters in November there was no willingness to discuss these issues. However, I continue to reach out to and stay in contact with abutters individually. Two of the five abutters on the Fairgrounds Road side of my site are either in support of the project, or engaged in discussions with me. There are some interesting ideas that have been raised that might make the project more agreeable to abutters. Obviously these ideas cannot be discussed without a willingness to talk. Some individual abutters tell me that they are "not part of any group," and are just waiting to see how this "negotiation" will play out. continue to be willing and interested in further discussions with neighbors. Perhaps if abutters will not meet with me as a group, the ZBA might be willing to serve as a mediator, inviting individual or smaller groups of abutters to a session you informally sponsor where we try to find common ground. A Final Comment I understand that financial analysis is an area where one answer can easily lead to a new series of questions. We have many of them ourselves. However, at this stage of the development process, a greater level precision is simply not available. The buildings have not been fully designed. The site plan will likely change somewhat. Meaningful construction pricing really only comes as the result of meaningful plans and serious negotiations. The level of information we have provided is considerably greater than the level that is required under the 40B process or has been required by the ZBA of other 40B developers. I look forward to the next meeting on December 17. If you have any questions in the meantime, please don't hesitate to contact me. Si 1 Jo tia osner enclosures Dec 10 03 O1:42p Rising Tide } Rugged Road and Scotts Way Housing Rising Tide Development Supplementary Cost information - Page 1 Prepared: December 6. 2003 General Site Costs she Clearance. Eart rnaft. Roadway and site drainage Water Mains and Services to Lots Sanitary Sewer System and Pump Stations Instell EWdM Telephone. CATV. Fire Alarm prapers SubV*de of all Paved areas Paving- IntwrkW Streets S'xlswalks and Btice Paths Concrete Curbs and Cap Cod Berm Scoffs Way Confirgency Sub -total Loam and Seed Otf-sits min (Allowance for bus s v*w, traffic...) Corrtirrgency ( inCNldplg other off sits costs) Total Lot Specific site costs: Excavate basement hole. BaoW, excavate and k1staii sewer service conneciion. water system, eleobical, constLe rough driveway and walks. loam and grade. Note: Foundation not included. 15,000 Allowance per housrrg unit Per Lot Landscaping allowance: 8,000 (finish drMee, walks, plantings. hedges) 6174921143 165,000 90,000 135,000 20,000 25,000 50,000 175,000 155,000 225,000 90,000 185,000 P.8 ATTACIEvffiNT 1 Pro Forma Est 435,000 30,000 75,000 100,000 1,520,000 .•1 �� Dec 10 03 01:43p Rising Tide 6174921143 p.9 Rugged Road and Scotts Way Housing Rising Tide Development Supplementary Cost information - Page 2 Prepared: December 5, 2003 Current Housing Construction Estimate Statistk:s from July 28 Pro Forma Total Residential Sq. Ft Average Sq. Ft Per Unit Total Residential Construction Est Avg. Res. Constr. Cost Per Sq. Ft Avg. Market Res. Const Cost Avg. Affordable Res. Const Cost Individual Residential Building Costs Sample Unit: Cottage Type A 4 BR Modular Unit, delWd on foundation Foundation Deck and stairs allowance Button -up, service connections Appliances allowance Special Flooring and Tile Contingency, including upgrades Total Sample Unit: 3BR Cottage Type B Modular Unit, deliv'd on foundation Foundation Deck and stairs allowance Button -up, service connections Appliances allowance Special Flooring and Tile Contingency, including upgrades Total Sample Unit: Two Family A-2-1100 SF 3BR Duplex Unit Modular Unit, delWd on foundation Foundation Deck and stairs allowance Button -up, service connections Appliances allowance Special Flooring and Tile Contingency, including upgrades Total 109,440 1520 $136 $139 $131 14,922,600 Sq. Ft $ per SF 2200 220,000 $100 18,000 10,000 65,000 3,000 7,500 10,000 333,500 $152 1450 150,000 $103 15,000 10,000 50,000 3,000 5,000 7,000 240,000 $166 1100 110,000 $100 10,000 7,500 40,000 3,000 5,000 7,000 182,500 $166 Dec 10 03 01:43p Rising Tide ATLANTIC H0MES,LLC December 9, 2003 W. Josh Posner Rising Tide Development, LLC 32 Arlington Street Cambridge, MA 02140 RE: Preliminary Pricing for Nantucket Project Dear Josh: 6174921143 p.10 ATTACHMENT 2 Phone: 508-6965252 Or. 781-444-0400 Fax 7814440601 Email: edCatiantic-orline.com Wabsite: www.adardic-onGne•comlmodular I have reviewed the preliminary plans prepared by Design Associates of your proposed development at Rugged Road on Nantucket for the purposes of evaluating it for modular construction_ As you are aware, Atlantic Homes, LLC is a licensed builder/dealer for EPOCH Homes. The plans were sent to the Epoch plant for review and preliminary pricing as factory -built modules. As the local builder/dealer, we would be pleased to work with you to complete the manufacture, delivery and onsite construction of the homes. Based on a preliminary review from Epoch, the units as drawn are currently running in the range of $125.00 per square foot, delivered and set. I believe, with some design modifications, we can accomplish a target budget of $100.00-$110.00 per square foot. This would equate to a per unit cost of approximately $121,000 to $$220,000, depending on the specific unit size and configuration. There is a significant premium associated with the current designs above Epoch Homes' standard designs, such as exterior details and unit configuration. As discussed, the costs for your initial plans ($125.00 psfl and even the targeted budget casts ($110.00 pst) exceed the costs of some of our more standard designs, including some of those which have been previously approved and built on the Island. EPOCH has enjoyed much success on Nantucket, having manufactured and delivered numerous dwellings there, all of which have obviously satisfied aesthetic requirements. I will be pleased to work with you and your design team to bring the costs down to the target range. Dec 10 03 01:43p Rising Tide 6174921143 p.11 Josh Posner December 4, 2003 Page two Please be aware that the costs discussed to date are for "delivery & set" only. This includes the cost of the modules, transportation to the island, crane, set crew and erection on your foundation. Not included are any custom interior finished beyond our standard "Preferred" specs, nor all the items necessary for "turnkey" construction, including but not limited to the following; Permits, excavation & backfill, utility connections, foundation, slab, lallys & sills, exterior buttouup, decks, stairs, interior buftnup, carpentry, touch up paint, f mace, electrical connections, plumbing connections, fiimace, appliances, finish grading, landscaping, driveways and decorative painting. Again, Atlantic Homes is pleased to work with you on this project. Please contact me if you have further questions. Sincerely, ATLANTIC HOMES, LLC r r� Edward Mian President Dec 10 03 01:43p Rising Tide 6174921143 p.12 cmaurylpo"I"P*4i" A RESORTQUEST' COMPANY tixelurtvr Afftllatr of SOTHEBY'S [nurmeewnd P-Wty Sharon Benson Doucette, President Joshua Posner January 16, 2003 Rising Tide Development LLC 32 Arlington Street Cambridge, MA 02140 Re: New Residential Community at Rugged Road and Scotts Way Dear Mr. Posner. ATTACHMENT 3 We have reviewed and discussed your preliminary plans for a new residential community to be developed on a 10 acre parcel of land between Rugged Road and Scotts Way east of Fairgrounds Road. The development will consist of a mixture of detached single-family and attached two family structures totaling approximately 72 homes arranged in a village -like setting with high quality landscaping, streets and drives. In addition we understand that you are considering including a community club house and swimming pool for residents. We further understand that approximately one third of the homes will be sold for lower prices with -resale restrictions to eligible owners earning incomes in the $50,000 to $100,000 range, while most of the homes will be sold at their full market price without restrictions. Our understanding of the new community is based on conversations with you as well as written materials describing the development concept and a preliminary site plan and building design. We understand that you envision that these homes will be similar to the modular housing constructed by Huntington Homes or other comparable modular builders with which we are very familiar -on Nantucket. You have asked that we estimate the potential sales prices for the unrestricted homes. There is a strong demand. for lower priced, smaller sized housing of this sort, particularly given the strength of the real estate market on Nantucket over the past years. Our estimate of achievable market prices for the units, along with the assumptions upon which they are based, is attached. Sincerely, 'et Hunter Attachment Dec 10 03 01:43p Rising Tide 6174921143 I A RESORTQUE5V COMPANY !Z4 exclusive Affiliate of SOTHEBY'S Lsu madooal ptmw Sharon Benson Doucette, President Estimated Sales Prices for Unrestricted Units Unit LMes Est. #s of Units Price Smaller Single Family Cottage 11 $525,000 (approx. 1600 Square Feet) Medium-sized Single Family Cottage 14 $675,000 (approx. 2200 Square Feet) Duplex Unit- Medium 17 $400,000 (approx. 1250 Square Feet) Duplex Unit- Smaller 5 $320,000 (approx. 1000 Square Feet) Assumptions: • Fee simple for single fancily detached; either fee simple with zem lot lines or 2 unit condominium ownership structure for duplex units. • Attractive site plan and quality level -of landscaping, streets, walks, drives, and common spaces. • Approximately one-third of the units within the community will be sold at reduced prices with restrictions on resale to income eligible owners as affordable housing. These units will not be readily distinguishable from unrestricted market rate homes from the exterior. • interior finish upgrades will be available for market rate homes including premium cabinets, countertops, appliances, flooring, bathrooms, wainscoting, additional rooms, finished basements and a variety of floor and building plans. We are generally familiar with the housing constructed by Huntington Homes and other modular builders and understand that the units will be of comparable quality to others done on Nantucket in recent years. Reasonable build -out schedule over a limited time period during which development is "under construction." • One or two model units will be built on site to support sales. A community -wide scale model and estimated build -out schedule will be available so that buyers can see how their unit will relate to the entire development • A Club House and swimming pool are currently planned for all residents. p.13 Dec 10 03 01:44p Rising Tide 6174921143 p.14 "A gq MCI j A RESOATQUEST" COMPANY FXCIUSIVe Afr/ltate of SOTHEBY'S International Realty Sharon Benson Doucette, President February 4, 2003 Comparable Nantucket sales in 2002 for the new residential community at Rugged Road and Scotts Way: These are sales of single family homes, and condos similar to those being proposed. Smaller Single Family Homes Date Sold Address Size Price Sold 5/30/02 5 Equator Drive 3 BR/ 2 BA $535,000 8/30/02 38 Appleton Road 3 BRI 2 BA $550,000 11/06/02 23 Appleton Road 3 BR/ 2 BA $550,000 10/25/02 32 Tashama 3 BR/ 2 BA $505,000 Medium Sized Sinele Family Homes 10/03/02 9 Goldfinch Drive 6/28/02 22 Folgen Avenue 8/02/02 *9 Curlew Court 6/14/02 *33 Autopscot 4 BR/ 2 BA $659,000 3 BR/ 3 BA $670,000 3 BR/ 2 % BA $690,000 2+BR/ 3 BA $695,000 *9 Curlew Court & 33 Autopscot are properties in subdivisions with pools. Duplex Unit — Medium 5/07/02 8 Cliff Road 2 BR/ 2 BA $495,000 10/02/02 6A Witherspoon 213R/ 2 %: BA $399,000 12/02/02 4B Goldfinch Drive 2 BR/ 2 BA $430,000 - t. . - - -t . . V 0 • •I 1 .. I -r Dec 10 03 01:44p Rising Tide 6174921143 p.15 uriel, 9 ' I o0} A RESOILTQUEST` COMPANY ExNrss(ne Afflf(are of SOTHEBY'S xnternadond Realty Sharon Benson Doucette, President Duplex Unit — Smaller 1/30/02 56 Essex Road 2 BR/ 1 Y2 BA $344,500 12/20/02 18 Miacomet Avenue 2 BR/ 1 BA $350,000 2/11/02 17B Old South Road 2 BR/ 1 V, BA $288,750 The demand for these units is greater than the supply. Dec 10 03 01:45p Rising Tide 6174921143 Comments on Ed Marchant's Financial Model p.16 ATTACH VIEENT 4 The following comments follows the format of the model prepared by Ed Marchant dated November 20, 2003 Asssum„ rations Fixed Costs: Land Acquisition Cost Site Preparation/Site Development Clubhouse and Pool Engineering Architectural Legal Project OH/Admin OK Our estimate is that $1.2 million fixed We believe a $400,000 allowance will result in the appropriate quality level. This cost is covered by the market unit sales prices. A reduction in the clubhouse should be reflected in lower market prices. OK $100,000 is fixed OK $300,000 is fixed. This item does not cover actual costs which are significantly higher, in any event. This is an allowable MHFA expense. Accounting OK APPra;c-al OK Items Not Included as Fixed Costs in Model: Construction Manager Application and Finance Fees Carrying Costs During Development Variable Costs: Residential Construction Hard Cost Contingency Permits Site Preparation/Site Development Landscaping Architectural Legal Insurance Project OH/Admin Construction Manager $100,000 or 50% is fixed. (Included in Architectural on REVISION B More fixed that variable $370,000 Costs vary by unit size and type. $136 average can be misleading as unit mixes change. See also: Main memo under Source of Construction Estimates. OK OK Since more of this is in Fixed Costs, Iess can be included as a variable cost. Use $27,000 OK OK OK OK See Fixed Costs Use $1500. See Fixed Costs Dec 10 03 01:45p Rising Tide 6174921143 p.17 Application/Financing Fees Carrying Costs During Development Marketing Fees Market Units 5% Moderate Units 3% Affordable Units 1% Soft Cost Contingency See Fixed Costs $2000 per unit OK Probably OK, Depends on Nantucket Housing Office I think Housing Office and Monitoring Agent will charge more than 1% OK Dec 10 03 01:45p Rising Tide a+ ca (n 5 f i t Q 6174921143 w�IJN (N(pps NpNppp6ry OWWI O CI10000Q0041 oC. soS z � � 3 A � T Rig P V OOIA 0 I 41 fJ+!D W V Wya000000 [� Npj (/i (n (A pl V NI.�1 V V W W W 00 p to M V V O W O I "I W O a W d O NO p O 0 "Cl 0 N0 0 0 0 C. 0 S O Ila p O A M �gy1gMNM y� .iJ i r►�J 44bw}A�WyyP��41+ g��mio dOV W+hfO UlU 91 H a CZ a 9 Op v�c 3m� 5� 5. v a � � 3 A � T Rig P V OOIA 0 I 41 fJ+!D W V Wya000000 [� Npj (/i (n (A pl V NI.�1 V V W W W 00 p to M V V O W O I "I W O a W d O NO p O 0 "Cl 0 N0 0 0 0 C. 0 S O Ila p O A M �gy1gMNM y� .iJ i r►�J 44bw}A�WyyP��41+ g��mio dOV W+hfO UlU 91 H Dec 10 03 01:45p A a Rising Tide 6174921143 0 o m m a o X33 m m T 0 P. 19 Dec 10 03 01:46p Rising Tide 6174921143 p.20 I It _o ill Ing_ fig a - 3 gill F� �q �p y �p W tN tpi. tNpi y+ a iV Of '� Np� O'��[p(��t�1 ��rp•Np Qppp1 V jp pO �pN71 �pp0 pp0o0SS pO SSS _{Oa7 N.•� W G1t O�O (FIQ�(07� S OO S af{ o m 000 500000 gill Scuclasuc _ LE- o m a m � N�� O O � N+W i.0 • Q N O }� N S� S ON p,p�S N m A SE W j p mp o p N j � �� O� O N OVI O�l p� O 7g� y00 do C O O i7 O C cn<'nvirnrnV�v�+R pp IO O O V V O OI O Ol O N A A W W NNN N N N N N N N N N N p O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CS 0 0 0 0 0 O O p , p?C:!: MM t!!W fn wws-��man> oi�aUaa otNao'mo�-oa�in�.iLiwoi a e a VQQ�ai:uQQii�QQQaSg� diQsBQ wawa ao V► Q' Pec 10 03 01:46p Rising Tide 6174921143 p.21 Jan 23 04 03:54p Rising Tide Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Nantucket I East Chestnut Street Nantucket, MA 02554 6174921143 RISIiIG TIDE DEVELOPMENT LLC 32 ARumum STREET . I;.AM9R10GE • MASSACHUSETTS • 02140 617.649.3232 1EL • 677.492.1149 FAX . jeihDosner0att6t.corn January 23, 2004 Dear Mr. Sanford and Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals: Based on the Board's discussion at the last hearing in which it attempted to arrive at an agreeable number of units for the Rugged Road/ Scotts Way development, I have tried to create some alternative scenarios that we could potentially live with and that might also be acceptable to the Board. I offer these alternatives in a spirit of negotiation, compromise and resolution as you deliberate about possible conditions for an approval. This memo does not constitute a withdrawal of our 72 unit proposal and we reserve our rights with respect to our original plan. I also submit that describing these potential alternatives should not extend the public hearing process which, as was stated at the last session, you expect to formally conclude at the January 29 session. I am prepared at the hearing next week to describe the altenaative scenarios more fully, but I wanted to give you the highlights in advance so that you would have additional time for consideration. The key features are: 1. All Single Family Homes, No Duplexes. 2. 48 homes with 2 Moderates (and 12 Lows), or 52 homes with 5 Moderates (and 13 Lows). 3. A mechanism to increase the number of Moderates in the 48 unit plan based on actual sales prices achieved or public funding. 4. 1Vlinimum buffer to abutters of 50 feet (increased from 20 feet in current plan). 5. Similar street layout reversed so that two streets enter from Scotts Way and one from Rugged Road. 6. Commitment in final engineering design of storm water management system to maximize swales. (Final design will be impacted by DEP/Natural Heritage requirements. Some underground infiltration is still possible/likely.) 7. Free connection to Town Water for existing homes of nearby abutters. Will explore possible connection to -Town Sewer. 8. Expanded common open space adjacent to Club House. 9. Minimum of 6 house styles with other variation in each from porches, exposures, etc. No home. can exceed current Cottage A (largest unit type) by more than 105/6. Average square footage of , homes cannot exceed 1950 SF. Height cannot exceed current plans by more than 2 feet. Z -d SOIL-aa2-ans swe l T T I M enu T -, „ILL - -r Jan 23 04 03:54p Rising Tide 6174321143 p.3 Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals Letter January 23, 2004 Page 2 10. Accommodation of nearly all suggestions from October 27, 2003 Planning Board memo to Zoning Board. 11. Developer to donate half (50%) of Developer Feet Profit earned above 15% as deiennined by final cost certification. 12. A site plan for the 48 unit alternative will submitted by Tuesday. If these parameters are acceptable to the ZBA, I would prepare revised site, civil engineering and . unit plans for your final review and approval as part of the final permitting process. I will meet with the Historic District Commission so that you have their comments before your final approval decision. I would expect our ability to proceed to be subject to ZBA final approval of these plans, as well as state approval of a sewer permit, DEP/Natural Heritage approval, building permit approval, etc. Thank you for your consideration and I look forward to Thursday's meeting. Si 1 , s Posner T -d Gn2i_-R27-anc cWC3,T T T T o" -II - r.... _ 01/29/2004 12:10 5089469955 CULLMAN ENGINEERING PAGE I � /02 V CIVIL tNGINEENING SUAVEYiNrr • TRANSPORT ATION DESIGN AUBURN • BOSTON • LAKEVILLE January 29, 2004 CEO No. 2023127-00 Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Nantucket 1 East Chestnut street Nantucket, mA 02554 Subject: Rugged Scott LLC 40B Application Response to Public Comments Nantucket Land Council — Mainstream Engineering Dear Members of the Board. Cullinan has reviewed the comment leiter from Tom Sexton of Mainstream Engineering dated January 26, 2004, regarding the Comprehensive Permit Application by Rugged Scott LLC. We have prepared the following response narrative for your review and confirmation, The Town of Nantucket Code, §139-126.(2)(s), requires that developments rendering a sfte more then 15% impervious provide a system for artificial recharge that will not degrade groundwater quality. The code also states that all drainage facilitles are to be preceded by oil. grease, and sediment traps to facilitate the removal of contamination. Section 139- 12B.(3)(b) of the code states "the respective Water Companies, in making their Finding of Water Quality Compliance, shall decide which techniques and practices are appropriate for each respective application." As we have stated on numerous previous occasions, the proposed drainage system has been reviewed and approved by the Wannacomet Water Company. The Wannacomet Water Company is the local agency empowered with determining compliance with these code requirements and has approved the drainage system thereby reaffirming that the drainage system will not degrade groundwater quality. The type of drainage system proposed is Commonly approved in the Groundwater protection District by the Planning Board and the Wannacomet Water Company. These systems have been constructed in numerous locations throughout the island with no known degradation of groundwater quality. The drainage system is designed in compliance with the Nantucket Code requirements and will not degrade groundwater quality. If you have any questions or comments please call me at (508) 946-9911. Very truly yours, Cullinan Engineering Co., Inc. aav AA-0�10_ Daniel C. Mulloy, PE, Senior Project Engineer cc: Josh Posner - Rising Tide Development, LLC. Arthur Reade - Reade, Gullicksen, Hanley & Gifford, LLP Linda Williams - Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals Lakeville Cavarate Pe►N 1.0 Riverside Drive, Lake0iie. MA 02347 P: 508-946-9911 F 50f1.946.9855 ane mg, 90 m 0 - co cD m cD lf,� /y�y .s p4jw, 64a9 fl fP� age? {fir TOWN OF NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FILE NO. 051-03 DECISION ON APPLICATION OF RUGGED SCOTT LLC COMPREHENSIVE PERMIT FOR THE RUGGED SCOTT LLC DEVELOPMENT 15,19 Rugged Road and 6, 8 Scott's Way (aka Scotts Way) Assessor's Map 67, Parcels 170,170.1,170.2 and 170.3, Plan Book 21, Page 106, Lots 19A, 1913,190 and 19D, Deed Reference 761153, zoned Limited -Use -General -2 1. BACKGROUND OF APPLICATION An application for a Comprehensive Permit pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws ("MGL") Chapter 40B, Sections (§) 20-23 ("the statute's for 72 units of housing was filed with the Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals ("the ZBA") by Rugged Scott LLC (the "Applicant" hereinafter) on April 30, 2003. The Applicant agreed that the initial Public Hearing could be scheduled for July 31, 2003 and granted an extension, which was duly filed with the Nantucket Town Clerk. The location of the property that is the subject of this application is four separate parcels at 15 and 19 Rugged Road and 6 and 8 Scott's Way. Notice of the Public Hearing on the Application was duly posted in the Town and County Building, was mailed to the Applicant, abutters, owners of land directly opposite on any public or private street or way, abutters to the abutters within three hundred feet of the property lines of the subject property, the Nantucket Planning Board and other Town Agencies, and was published in the Nantucket Inquirer and Mirror newspaper on July 10 and 17, 2003. A Public Hearing on the Application was first held in the Large Group Instruction Room of the Nantucket High School, 10 Surfside Road, Nantucket, Massachusetts at 6:00 PM on July 31, 2003, and was continued to September 25, 2003, October 30, 2003, November 20, 2003, December 17, 2003, January 29, 2004, February 19, 2004, and again to March 17, 2004, during which the ZBA, the neighbors, and other concerned parties discussed changes to the plan with the Applicant. The public hearing was closed on March 17, 2004. The ZBA was assisted by Mr. Edward Marchant, a consultant, hired to advise on the 40B statute and procedural questions.The ZBA also received a report from the Nantucket Planning Board, dated October 27, 2003, which commented on requested waivers, traffic issues, density, lot layout, housing type and location. The members of the ZBA hearing this application were Mr. Edward J. Sanford, Chairman, Mr. C. Richard Loftin, Mr. Edward Murphy, Mrs. Nancy J. Sevrens, and Mr. David R. Wiley. The ZBA has adopted no local rules and regulations governing applications filed pursuant to MGL Chapter 40B, and accordingly, the model rules prepared by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD), are the rules applicable to this Application. The Public Record of this Decision includes, but is not limited to, the Application, including reports, plans, and specifications, supplemental materials listed in Exhibit B; the correspondence between the Applicant and the ZBA, agency and peer review reports, written material received during the public process; and such other information on file with the ZBA at the Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals office. 11. BACKGROUND OF MGL CHAPTER 40B This is an application, pursuant to MGL Chapter 40B, § 20-23, for a Comprehensive Permit for the construction of 72 dwelling units in single-family and duplex structures. During the public hearing, the ZBA voted 3-2, with Sanford, Sevrens, Murphy in favor and Loftin and Wiley opposed, on January 29, 2004, to support a maximum of 40 dwelling units consisting of 26 market -rate, ten (10) affordable (see 111,6(2) below) and four (4) middle-income units (see III,B(2) below). This revision eliminated 32 dwelling units from the original application due to density concerns and based on housing needs. The approved 40 dwelling units will be detached single- family homes in fee simple ownership, which the ZBA found to be consistent with the neighborhood. The housing is proposed pursuant to the Housing Starts Program of the Mass Housing Finance Agency (MHFA). 25% of the units or ten units will be sold to households whose annual incomes do not exceed 80% of the annual median income for Nantucket as defined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development ("HUD"), with no more than 30% of their annual income going toward their interest and principal mortgage payments, real estate taxes, insurance, private mortgage insurance and any homeowners' association fees, hereinafter referred to as the "affordable units". III. THE PUBLIC HEARING A. Jurisdictional Ry-guirements At the first Public Hearing, Mr. Marchant gave a detailed presentation regarding the MGL Chapter 40B process and the floor was open for questions from the public. Mr. Marchant explained how the Applicant satisfied the jurisdictional requirements of the statute (see D. Findings of Fact, below) as well as the ZBA's role as the local permitting granting authority. B. Project Dgsedialon The Applicant, represented by Mr. Joshua Posner, principal, outlined the Rugged Scott LLC Development proposal, with the assistance of the Applicant's consulting architect, Mr. Christopher Dalmus, AIA, of Design Associates, Inc.; consulting engineer, Mr. Dan Malloy, PE, Senior Project Manager of Cullinan Engineering, Inc; and the Applicant's counsel, Mr. Arthur Reade. As previously stated, the initial project proposed the construction of 72 dwelling units in single-family and duplex structures. 1.) Physical Characteristics The land is a 10.0 +/- acre, vacant, wooded, site. The surrounding area is residential. Immediately abutting properties to the east and west contain single-family dwellings and outbuildings on lots of 50,000 to 80,000 square feet or greater. These properties are within the Limited -Use General -2 (LUG -2) zoning district, as is the subject site. To the north of the site, immediately across a paved private way, known as Rugged Road, is an area zoned Residential -2 (R-2) with a minimum lot size requirement of 20,000 square feet. Most lots in the area have been improved with single-family dwellings. To the south, across a separate dirt, private way, known as Scott's Way, is a 66.7 +/- acre, wooded, tract of land that is part of a Boy Scout camp. The site is level and the underlying soil type is "Evesboro association" according to the Soil Survey of Nantucket County Massachusetts. It is described as "Nearly level and gently sloping, excessively drained, sandy soils formed in outwash deposits." There is a sewer line and water line proximate the Locus on Rugged Road. 2.) Affordability The proposed prices for the ten (10) affordable units are estimated to be approximately between $218,000 and $235,000 for the three (3) and four (4) bedroom homes, respectively, based upon current income guide -lines and the pro forma submitted by the Applicant dated July 28, 2003. In addition, four (4) units will be sold to middle-income households whose annual incomes do not exceed 150% of the annual median income for Nantucket as defined by HUD. The maximum sales price would be based upon an assumption that no more than 30% of their annual income would be used for interest and principal mortgage payments, real estate taxes, insurance, private mortgage insurance and any Homeowners' Association fees, hereinafter referred to as the "middle-income " or "Nantucket Housing Needs Covenant (NHNC) units". The prices for the four (4) middle-income units are estimated to be between $319,000 and $347,000 for the three (3) and four (4) bedroom homes, respectively, based upon current NHNC rules and regulations, and based on said pro forma submitted by the Applicant. Final prices for affordable and middle-income units shall be established in accordance with State regulations and NHNC requirements prior to unit marketing based upon pertinent income data and MassHousing or, if applicable, in accordance with the appropriate DHCD Guidelines for "Housing Programs in which Funding is Provided Through a Non-governmental Entity" in effect at the time the initial lottery is done. A "window of affordability" shall be created for the ten (10) affordable units in that, although household eligibility will be based upon 80% or less of median family income, the initial sales prices for the ten (10) affordable units will be established by assuming that household median family income is no greater than 70% of median family income. C. Public Cgnmment At each session of the Public Hearing, the ZBA asked for public comment. Many residents from the surrounding area and other interested parties spoke at various times. They expressed concerns about density, traffic, drainage, site plan design, noise, and other "quality of life" issues. The ZBA also received many questions about the pro forma and the ability of the development to maintain long-term affordability. In addition to input from several pertinent Town departments, including a report from the Nantucket Planning Board, dated October 27, 2003, which commented and made recommendations on the requested waivers, traffic issues, density, lot layout, housing type, buffers and location, the ZBA retained two (2) engineering firms at the Applicant's expense to conduct a peer review of the traffic and engineering submittals. The engineering peer review report submitted by Horsley and Witten, the ZBA's engineering consultant, is dated July 3, 2003, revised July 25, 2003 and updated March 26, 2004, and the traffic peer review report by Rizzo and Associates, the ZBA's traffic consultant, is dated October 2, 2003 and updated October 21, 2003. D. Findings of Fact 1. The ZBA has jurisdiction to issue a comprehensive permit in accordance with the Act, in accordance with the following: a. The Applicant, Rugged Scott LLC, is a limited dividend corporation within the meaning of the Act. b. The MassHousing Housing Starts Program (the "Program") has been accepted as an eligible program under the Act by the Housing Appeals Committee. The Applicant proposes to fund the project with funding from MassHousing. The Applicant has received a Project Eligibility letter, pursuant to 760 CMR 31.01 (2), for the project from MassHousing; therefore, the Applicant fulfills the requirement of 760 CMR 31.01(1)(b) that: "The project shall be fundable by a subsidizing agency under a low and moderate income subsidy program." Thus, the project complies with the regulations concerning fundability by a subsidizing agency. Construction financing by a private bank lender operating under the New England Fund program of the Federal Home Loan Bank of Boston may be allowed provided that MassHousing remains the Project Administrator overseeing enforcement of the terms of the Regulatory and Monitoring Agreements and written permission from MassHousing and DHCD is received. C. The Applicant has demonstrated that it has control of the property by providing the ZBA with a copy of the deed conveying the title in the property from Steven C. Jemison, aka Stephen C. Jemison, to the Applicant, Rugged Scott LLC c/o Rising Tide Development LLC, dated June 8, 2000, and recorded at the Nantucket Registry of Deeds, Deed Book 761, Page 53. 2. The Project is consistent with local needs: a. Based on the statistics maintained by DHCD and presented by the Applicant, the Town has fallen significantly short (only 2.48%) of the goal of 10% of its year-round housing units dedicated to low and moderate -income level households. This is despite the fact that the Town and Nantucket Housing Authority (NHA) has produced 100 units of MGL Chapter 40B eligible housing based upon the DHCD inventory dated October 1, 2001 updated to April 24, 2002, and there have been numerous housing initiatives, including actions taken at recent Annual Town Meetings, all in an effort to meet the substantial community need for housing. b. Although the proposed density is significantly above that allowed by the current zoning district (LUG -2), the ZBA finds both higher and lower actual density within the area. The ZBA required modifications including a 44% decrease in the number of units, restriction of one dwelling unit per lot, creation of meaningful buffer areas, a 50 foot building setback line and other site changes agreed upon with the Applicant through the public hearing and meeting process that have significantly reduced and/or mitigated the impacts to the neighborhood. 3. The Project raises significant local health and safety issues: a. The Project must rely on municipal sewer and water service in order to support the density of development proposed by the Applicant. The project is within the Public Wellhead Recharge Overlay District. If on-site septic systems were proposed, the project would have an adverse impact on the Island's sole source aquifer. The nearest connections to public water and sewer are adjacent to the site, however the existing sewer line has reached capacity at a location far from the site at Newtown Road (a.k.a. New Town Road). The existing sewer line cannot receive substantial amounts of additional flow and a bypass sewer line needs to be constructed between Newtown Road (a.k.a. New Town Road) to a point near the Rotary. Construction of this bypass sewer line is essential to the issuance of a building permit for this project. b. There are no constructed pedestrian facilities along Scott's Way, a dirt road. The nearest interconnected pedestrian and bicycle path is on Surfside Road although a planned facility along Fairgrounds Road is anticipated in the near future. The lack of these facilities is deemed to be an unsafe situation for pedestrians and bicyclists given the level of vehicular traffic proposed for the site. Although a combined bicycle and pedestrian path along the north side of Rugged Road exists, which path was installed as a condition of the nearby 19 -lot "Seikinnow Place" subdivision, the path would be inadequate to serve the needs of the future residents of the area. As with any comparable subdivision, sidewalks through the site are 4 necessary to ensure pedestrian and bicycle safety. Scott's Way must be upgraded from its current condition to accommodate the additional traffic generated from this development. C. To mitigate the traffic impacts identified in b., above, the ZBA believes that construction of interior sidewalks, construction of Scott's Way and an extension of a bike path along Scott's Way are minimum requirements necessary to ensure vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle safety to and from the site. In addition, off-site improvements are warranted because of the project's impact on traffic in the immediate area. The ZBA hereby requires the contribution of $35,555" to be placed in a segregated account prior to the issuance of a building permit, administered by the ZBA or its designee, for traffic mitigation measures within a one -mile radius of the site. " Calculated as follows: $24,000=Cost of Bus Pun out $40,000=Cost of Fairgrounds Road/Old South Road Intersection Reconstruction $64,000 x 40172 (unit reduction)=$35,555 Source of Costs: 3/17/04 Memo, Nantucket Electric Land Purchase by Doug Unruh E. ZBA Discussion and Vote After ZBA discussion at its meeting held on May 24, 2004, a Motion was made by Edward Murphy, seconded by C. Richard Loftin, to approve the Comprehensive Permit, and to allow only those exceptions from the Nantucket local By-laws and regulations, as shown on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and to incorporate CONDITIONS into the Comprehensive Permit. The ZBA finds that relaxing certain restrictions are necessary to ensure affordability, but that the following conditions and restrictions are necessary to protect the public health, safety and environment and that such conditions and restrictions would not make the project uneconomic. CONDITIONS I. General 1.1 The Project shall be constructed in substantial compliance with the following plans of record subject to final revisions as stated herein. Any deviation, ruled by the ZBA to be substantial, from these plans and/or directly related conditions and documents shall be a modification of this Comprehensive Permit by the ZBA as set forth in 760 CMR 31.03. • "Conceptual Plan" (4 sheets) dated April 28, 2003 by Weinmayr Associates, Inc. ■ "PRELIMINARY COMPREHENSIVE PERMIT PLANS, PROPOSED HOUSING FOR RUGGED ROAD AND SCOTTS WAY" (6 sheets) by Cullinan Engineering Co., Inc., dated April 30, 2003. ■ OVERALL LAYOUT PLAN, PROPOSED HOUSING FOR RUGGED ROAD AND SCOTTS WAY" (i sheet) by Cullinan Engineering Co., Inc., dated September 24, 2003. ■ Drawing D15.28 "conceptual plan" dated February 17, 2004 and "marts -up" dated February 19, 2004 by Weinmayr Associates, Inc. ■ "Comprehensive Permit Application for Rising Tide LLC by Design Associates, Inc., dated April 2, 2003, (3 sheets) 1.2 Revisions to plans. The following revisions shall be made to the plans to be submitted to the ZBA for final approval as required by 4.1 below: 1.2.1 The project shall be limited to no more than 40 detached, single- family dwelling units, 26 market rate units, ten (10) restricted to households at or below 80% of median family income as defined by HUD and four (4) restricted to middlemincome (up to 150% median) households, all held in fee simple. Total bedrooms for the site shall not exceed 139 and no unit shall have more than four (4) bedrooms. Total square footage (not including garages, basements and clubhouse) shall not exceed 75,500 square feet of habitable space. The clubhouse shall be limited to a maximum ground cover of 2,500 square feet. All plans, building schedules, etc. will be amended so as to address these limits. 1.2.2 The final plan will show Road "A", Road "B", Road "C" and Road "En; with Road "DO being eliminated. Roads "A", "B", and OF will be fee -simple lots to be conveyed to the Homeowners Association (see 3.1). Road "C" will be an easement The Roads shall be designated with names to be approved by the ZBA on the final plans. 1.2.3 Road "A" shall be constructed to a width of 24 feet between curbs except (1) between its intersection with Rugged Road to its intersection with Road OF and, (2) between its intersection with Scoff's Way to its intersection with Road "C'. In these two areas, the width shall be 20 feet between curbs and the pavement shall be marked with a "no parking" yellow line on both sides of the road.. The western side of Road "A" shall be appropriately marked as Ono parking." Additional signage may be required at the discretion of the ZBA. 1.2.4 Road "B" shall be constructed to a width of 18 feet between curbs and the pavement shall be marked with a "no parking" yellow line on the eastern side of the road and both sides of the road between Scott's Way and Road "C". " Additional signage may be required at the discretion of the ZBA. 1.2.5 Road "C" shall be paved, 16 feet in width, similar to Roads "A" and "B". 1.2.6 Twenty -five-foot wide perimeter lots to be owned by the Association, comprising a "no -disturb" buffer area as further discussed at 2.7 below, shall be shown upon the final plan. 1.2.7 Interior sidewalks shall be constructed of brick pavers. 1.2.8 Driveway aprons shall be shown on the plans. 1.2.9 All parking areas shall be identified including the designation of all impervious improvements. 1.2.10 The final plans shall show a "hybrid" drainage system that incorporates the use of vegetative swales to the extent practicable and without the necessity of impacting proposed "no disturb" buffer areas or existing trees. The ZBA must receive final comments from the ZBA's consulting engineers and the Wannacomet Water Company reviewing the adequacy of the final drainage system design. 6 1.3 Subsequent to the end of all applicable appeal periods and prior to the com- mencement of construction, the Applicant shall record this Decision in the Nan- tucket Registry of Deeds senior to any other liens on the property, and shall provide the ZBA and the Building Department, including the Zoning Enforcement Officer, with documentation of the filing of this Decision or a copy of the Decision with all recording information thereon. 1.4 The Applicant shall submit to the Historic District Commission ("HDC") the items listed in 4.1 a., f., g. and h. of this Decision and all information normally submitted to the HDC for a Certificate of Appropriateness ("COA") no later than 60 days prior to submitting the above plans to the ZBA. The Applicant shall meet in a reasonable manner with the HDC and make best efforts to satisfy HDC suggestions, requests and comments. The Applicant shall request in writing that the HDC prepare a formal comment letter for submission to the ZBA. Assuming that the HDC is willing to submit such a letter, the ZBA will review all HDC comments and make a Decision related to incorporating some or all of the HDC comments into the final plans. The ZBA retains final review authority on HDC - related design parameters on the above listed final plans and other documents relating to the initial permitting of the subject project. The Applicant shall submit final architectural plans approved by the ZBA for the structures that are part of the project to the Building Department and the HDC. Final occupancy of all structures shall require a Certificate of Occupancy issued by the Building Department. The Applicant shall request inspections of completed buildings by the HDC staff and the ZBA hereby designates HDC staff as its agent to sign -off on the building permit card, confirming that the structure meets the requirements of the final ZBA approved plans. After the issuance of a building permit, the ZBA hereby designates the HDC to review and approve any changes in accordance with their normal reviews that are not inconsistent with the original ZBA approval, by issuance of a COA. 1.5 This Comprehensive Permit shall not be transferable without the prior written approval of the ZBA. 1.6 The Applicant shall not cause any further site disturbance until all permits pursuant to 1.9 below have been issued and no tree removal, grading or layout, construction of roadways, drainage or other site disturbance shall be undertaken prior to the receipt of final approval of all required plans and legal documents required herein including but not limited to conditions contained in 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 2.1, 2.2, 4. 1, and 4.7, and the completion of any applicable appeal periods and/or the conclusion of any appeal(s) or legal action(s) except for: (1) Surveying activities at the perimeter of the site; (2) Those activities necessary to conduct the endangered species study required by 1.9 below. Additional site testing of soil types and archaeology may commence, subject to the above conditions regarding tree removal/alteration. (3) Other related testing, the exact nature of which is not known, but is related to environmental/archaeological/historic resource issues, may also occur subject to prior written notification to the ZBA to commencement of such disturbance. The Applicant shall utilize the least intrusive means to conduct the activities described above such as hand -auger test pits. The Applicant shall not cause any trees greater than 4 -inch caliper or 5 feet in height to be removed or significantly altered for the above-described activities. Minor, minimal removal of branches and shrubs for surveying sight lines and as part of on-site investigation shall be the only disturbance to the existing vegetation. As a condition of this approval, the Applicant shall exercise care to not impact the intent of the "no disturb" buffer area's purpose of protecting adjacent residences from the visual and noise impacts by excessively trimming trees or trampling low- lying shrubs and brush. The ZBA reserves the right to require additional screening, including but not limited to the planting of new trees and/or shrubs beyond those required by 2.7 below, if it is presented with evidence that these above conditions have been violated. The Applicant shall retain mature, healthy trees, as is practicable, within the general area to be disturbed by roadway and house construction consistent with the landscape plan required by 4.1g. 1.7 Except to the extent modified by the conditions, the Applicant shall be bound by the submissions contained in the Application (as revised) for approval and shall be bound by the representations made by it, or on its behalf, at the public hearings and meetings held to consider the granting of this permit. 1.8 The terms, provisions, and conditions of this Decision shall bind, burden, and benefit the successors and assigns of the Applicant and run with the land. 1.9 The Applicant shall provide the following permits and/or documentation of compliance with the following environmental programs and or requirements before any site clearing: ■ Massachusetts Historical Commission (MHC) ■ Sewer Extension Permit, Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) • Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) ■ Massachusetts Endangered Species Act (MESA) ■ Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) It is a condition of this Decision that the above listed State and/or Federal requirements shall be met by the Applicant. 2. Programmatic issues 2.1 The Applicant must identify an independent monitoring agent, acceptable to the ZBA, to monitor the project, pursuant to the Regulatory Agreement described in 2.2 below. The Applicant shall bear all reasonable costs for the monitoring agent's contract/services. The Nantucket Housing Office (NHO) as designated by the Nantucket Housing Authority (N HA) and/or the Citizens' Housing and Plan- ning Association, of Boston, Massachusetts ("CHAPA") have been identified by the Applicant as potential monitoring agents, and either is acceptable to the ZBA. 2.2 The Applicant, the ZBA, and NHA-NHO/CHAPA, shall execute a Regulatory Agreement, subject to the review and approval of Town Counsel prior to recording in the Nantucket Registry of Deeds, which shall incorporate without limitation the following conditions as to affordability: a.) Twenty-five (25%) percent of the units shall remain affordable in perpetuity or for as long as the project does not comply with local requirements, whichever is longer. Except as hereinafter stated, such units shall be sold to households whose annual income, adjusted for family size, does not exceed 80% percent of the median family income for Nantucket as defined by HUD. A Deed Rider, subject to the review and approval of Town Counsel, shall be executed and recorded for each affordable unit. Applicant agrees that prior to the closing of the first affordable unit, Applicant will modify the form of Deed Rider used for the affordable units to include any additional reasonable provisions that will further protect the long-term affordability of the affordable unit, if such language is provided to the Applicant by the monitoring agent and/or ZBA in a timely manner. The purpose of this condition is to ensure that the actual Deed Rider used and recorded reflects the then current "state- of-the-art" for such deed riders to ensure that affordable units are protected for the longest possible legal period and to minimize the risk that such homes may be lost for any reason as an affordable housing resource. b.) The four (4) middle-income units shall be subject to a Nantucket Housing Needs Covenant (NHNC), ownership form, for a household whose income does not exceed 150°x6 of the annual median income for Nantucket as defined by HUD. C.) The affordable and middle-income units shall be marketed and sold to the fullest extent legally permissible, with preference for Nantucket residents, with monitoring of the lottery process by the ZBA or its designee. d.) Any mortgage loan to an affordable unit owner/buyer that is secured by any of the ten (10) affordable units shall be subject to the perpetual MGL Chapter 40B affordability requirement that is a fundamental condition of this Comprehensive Permit, unless Applicant/owner/buyer can demonstrate to the ZBA through clear and convincing evidence that this requirement prevents affordable unit buyers from securing reasonable mortgage loan financing satisfactory to allow the timely sale of the affordable units, despite Applicant's/owner's/buyer's best efforts to identify acceptable lenders willing to make such subordinated loans. Best efforts by the Applicant/owner/buyer would have to include earnest and timely discussions with local lenders, particularly with those that have participated as mortgage lenders in the NHNC program. Based upon prior local lending practices in Nantucket for middle-income (NHNC) units, it is hereby assumed that suitable loan financing subject to a perpetual affordability requirement can be secured for the four (4) middle-income units. 2.3 Prior to the start of construction, the Applicant shall record the aforesaid Regulatory Agreement, after execution by all required parties, at the Nantucket Registry of Deeds, with a marginal reference to the deed or deeds for the Locus to the Applicant. 2.4 Applicant shall submit an audited cost certification of all revenues and expenses, including any rebates received from suppliers, prepared by a Certified Public Accountant acceptable to the Monitoring Agent. Such cost certification shall comply with the requirements established by the Monitoring Agent in conformance with MGL 40B guidelines. 2.5 The Applicant shall employ no fewer than six (6) distinct styles of homes in accordance with a chart submitted by the Applicant entitled "Unit Program" dated February 19, 2004 (see Exhibit E, the "Chart"). Although the chart shows only four (4) styles, there will be distinctions among the designs subject to final approval by the ZBA. The units will generally correspond to the unit sizes contained in the Chart. No three-bedroom unit shall be less than 1200 square feet of habitable area (not including basements or garages) or any unit greater than 2700 square feet of habitable area (not including basements or garages). The unit styles shall be distributed to avoid a concentration of styles in any particular location. There shall be no more than ten (10) dwellings of any style home. There will be no "Cottage Type E" affordable or middle-income units but a minimum of one (1) and a maximum of four (4) of the remaining three (3) styles of each home design shall be employed for affordable units. A minimum of one "Cottage Type A, B and F" style shall be employed for the middle-income units. 2.6 All units shall consist of individual lots owned in fee simple and approximately 4,000 to 15,000 sq. ft in lot area, each improved with one single-family dwelling. All lots shall have a minimum of 20 feet of frontage on a road or way. Lots with frontage on Rugged Road or Scott's Way shall be restricted from constructing any driveway access directly to Scott's Way or Rugged Road. Front -yard setbacks shall be a minimum of five (5) feet and a maximum of ten (10) feet with a minimum clearance of five (5) feet from the edge of any sidewalk for those lots fronting on Roads "A" and "B", except for those lots that the ZBA designates a waiver from this setback requirement on the final plans. It is expected that the Applicant may propose a small number of lots with larger front yard setbacks as shown on the "Drawing D15.28 (see 1.1). Minimum sidetrear yard setbacks shall be five (5) feet, except for those lots affected by a 50 -foot building setback line (see 2.8 below). Maximum ground cover on each lot shall be 30%. No more than 40% or a maximum of 2500 square feet of impervious surface (which includes the dwelling units), whichever is less, shall be allowed on any lot. Each lot shall be restricted to one dwelling unit only, except for the clubhouse/pool/lawn/tennis facility lot, which shall be restricted to no dwelling units. 2.7 The "no disturb" buffer area lots described in 1.2.6 above shall be a minimum of 25 feet in depth from the adjoining property lines and a minimum of 25 feet in depth from Rugged Road and Scott's Way, exempting the Road lots and lots that have "reverse frontage" as shown on the final site plan. The "no disturb' buffer area lots shall be considered permanently protected open space consistent with MGL Chapter 4OA § 9. Based upon the information presented, the ZBA determines that an adequate buffer standard should be at least one (1) tree per ten (10) linear feet of the "no disturb" buffer area perimeter, said trees being a minimum height of five (5) feet and minimum caliper of three (3) inches. Planting should occur within or at the edges of the "no disturb" buffer areas as directed by the ZBA or its designee. The total required planting of new trees based on a perimeter measurement (2,729.98 feet) minus the Road lots (3 Road lots, Road "A" at Scott's Way and Rugged Road, Road "B") x 40 ft-- 120 ft), is 261 trees (2,609.98 feet x 1 tree/10 feet --260.98). Trees shall be planted in a natural pattern, shall be offset where appropriate and are meant to supplement existing, mature vegetation. This condition shall be incorporated into the final landscaping plan required by 4.1 g. The ZBA reserves the right to alter any aspect of this standard and vary tree sizes and locations based upon a review of the detailed final landscape plan. The Applicant shall stake the proposed locations for these required trees for review with the goal being to maximize the screening between the easterly and westerly properties and the proposed houses from Rugged Road. The final landscaping plan and a schedule for the planting of all required trees submitted for review by the ZBA shall identify species of conifers that would meet the above goal and be suitable for planting in the "no disturb" buffer areas to the satisfaction of the ZBA or its designee. The ZBA reserves the right to alter any aspect of this procedure and specify alternative tree types and species based upon a review of the detailed final landscape plan. 10 The Applicant shall be responsible for maintaining the health of these trees until the sale of the 40th lot. Thereafter, the Homeowner's Association shall maintain the trees of the "no disturb" buffer area, including the replacement of unhealthy, diseased or dead trees. This condition shall be included in the Homeowner's Association documents. As stated in 1.8 above, the ZBA reserves the right to require additional plantings in the event that care in preserving existing vegetation of the "no disturb" buffer area is not undertaken by the Applicant until the completion of the project. 2.8 A 50 -foot building setback line shall be established from the easterly and westerly property lines. This restriction shall be enforceable by the Town of Nantucket in perpetuity or the longest time period allowed by law and shall prevent the erection of any permanent structure or building within its limits. The Applicant shall execute a restriction granting said right of enforcement to the Town of Nantucket. 3. Management Issues 3.1 A Homeowner's Association (the "Association") shall be established by the Applicant for the maintenance of all common areas including the club- house/pool/lawn/tennis facility, roadways including drainage facilities, swales, sidewalks, bike paths, and shoulders. The Association shall be governed by By- laws, submitted to the ZBA for review and approval as required pursuant to 4.1. The Association may be legally created, accept deeds to the Road lots and common facilities and undertake other administrative/organizational actions but shall not assume road, infrastructure maintenance or clubhouse/pool/lawn/tennis court facility management until all of the infrastructure is completed or the 30th lot is conveyed. The Association shall be initially endowed by the Applicant in the amount of $250.00 per lot and shall determine assessments for common area maintenance. The Association shall administer the fund and the ZBA shall be named as the third -party administration agent. The Association may promulgate rules and regulations, consistent and in compliance with the terms and conditions of this decision and those specific conditions in 3.2 below. These rules and regulations may include, but are not limited to, setting standards regarding (1) the conduct of its residents, (2) appearance of property, (3) minimum maintenance requirements, (4) procedures to address nuisance issues such as problematic pets, (5) parking, (6) rental terms and conditions for market -rate units, and (7) hours of operation and conditions related to the use of the clubhouse, pool and tennis courts. 3.2 The following conditions and rules and regulations shall be binding upon the Owners, the Occupants and the Association, under the authority of the Association, its agents, designees, and assigns: a.) Affordable units or middle-income units may not be rented and they must remain owner -occupied. This condition shall be reflected in the Deed Rider. Rentals of market rate units shall be undertaken by an agent of the Association so as to ensure compliance with the rules, regulations and standards governing the units. b.) No more than two (2) adult persons per bedroom may occupy any of the units. This condition shall not apply to minor children under 18 years of age, except that in no case shall total occupancy of the units exceed three 11 (3) persons per bedroom, including adults and minors. This condition is further restricted by 3.2 (d) below. C.) Dwelling units may be expanded beyond the original "building footprint" shown on the final plans, subject to the following requirements: Expanded ground cover, as defined in the Nantucket Zoning By-law may not exceed 15% of the unit's original ground cover, Expansion may not increase the overall room count of the dwelling, said room count not including bathrooms; additional bedrooms being expressly prohibited; and Expansion must receive a COA from the HDC and be constructed pursuant to a duly issued building permit, and shall receive permission from the Association. No Owner or Occupant may add secondary dwelling units, apartments, or studios. Garages, new or expanded parking and/or impervious areas not shown on the final site plan, fences, and sheds for the storage of garbage receptacles, lawnmowers, bicycles, toys, and similar items may be allowed by written consent of the Association, must apply for and receive a COA from the HDC, and must be constructed pursuant to a duty issued building permit. No garages, or parts thereof, shall be used for human habitation. A hose bib and/or utility -work sink shall be the only allowable plumbing fixtures within the interior area of a garage. No garage may contain a studio. d.) No units shall be occupied as a dormitory, employer dormitory, rooming house or like housing, as such housing may be defined by the Nantucket Zoning Bylaw. No more than five (5) individuals unrelated by marriage are allowed to reside in any dwelling unit except that, prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupang or one (1) year from the issuance of the building permit for the 39` dwelling, whichever occurs sooner, workers engaged in construction on the subject property may exceed the five (5) person limit by up to three (3) additional persons (eight total) provided that they occupy a dwelling unit as one household and abide by the conditions set forth in these rules and regulations. There must also be an acceptable plan to address any automobile parking issues related to such occupancies. e.) The Association shall have the authority and lien powers to collect fees for common area maintenance, including the power to impose reasonable fines for failure to comply with the conditions of the Comprehensive permit. f.) Among other uses, Association fees collected may be used for contribution in common with other abutters whose properties front and gain access onto Rugged Road and Scott's Way to maintain adjacent portions of these streets, and to provide for snow removal, until, if and when, the Town or County of Nantucket assumes this responsibility. g.) The Owners and Occupants shall keep their exterior areas in a high state of maintenance and cleanliness, with the Association having the power to enforce compliance and to take such curative or remedial action as the Association may deem necessary, and to place liens on units for the Association's expenses incurred in so doing. 12 h.) The Association shall keep the roads, catch basins, drainage infrastructure, clubhouse/pool/lawn/tennis facility and other common areas and common improvements in a high state of maintenance and cleanliness. i.) No unregistered, uninsured and inoperable vehicles, boats, campers or recreational vehicles shall be allowed on-site overnight unless enclosed in a garage. Commercial vehicles other than pickup trucks and passenger automobiles used in association with a resident's profession or business shall not be allowed. P Exterior/outdoor lighting shall be low -wattage, uni-directional, downward facing, and prevent glare from occurring on adjacent property. k.) No commercial signs of any kind, including "For Rent", or "For Sale" signs shall be posted. I.) There shall be no change in the By-laws of the Association without the approval of 75% of each of the three (3) income levels of the Owners as follows: Market Rate -26 units x 75%=(19.5)=20 Middle -Income - 4 units x 75%= 3 Affordable -10 units x 75%=(7.5) = 8 Owners may not vote changes inconsistent with the Comprehensive Permit and any conditions thereto, the approved Regulatory Agreement and/or the approved Deed Rider. M.) Owners wishing to make changes to their units that the ZBA determines to be minor and that vary from the final plans identified at 4.1 a., f., g., and h. must apply for and receive a COA from the HDC if the changes are subject to normal H.D.C. jurisdiction and permission from the Association is granted. n.) All driveways shall be either brick, cobblestone, Belgium block, white gravel or shell, with a minimum of two (2) off-street parking spaces on each lot. Driveway aprons shall be constructed at the intersection with all paved roadways in conformance with Chapter 139 (Zoning) §20.1 of the Nantucket Code. o.) The clubhouse/pool/lawn/tennis court facility shown on the plans shall be available only to those residents of the site and their accompanied guests for personal use. The facility shall not be open to the public. The clubhouse may not function as a restaurant or bar as these terns are defined in the Nantucket Zoning Code. Use of the facility for functions with food and/or alcohol service may be allowed as an accessory use subject to all Zoning and other regulatory requirements. Memberships shall be provided to all residents on a fee schedule to be adopted by the Association provided, however, that any fee for an affordable or middle- income unit is factored into the 30% maximum housing expense calculation. The Association shall establish hours of operation for the facility and guidelines for occupancy, noise, and lighting that preserve the rights of nearby residents to quiet enjoyment of their property, which shall be subject to final ZBA approval. 13 Notwithstanding the above resident restriction, abutting property owners as shown on a map attached hereto as Exhibit D shall be allowed access to the facility subject to a comparable fee structure and in accordance with rules and regulations established by the Association. A minimum of ten (10) non-resident family memberships shall be offered and a maximum of 30 non-resident family memberships may be allowed by vote of the Association. 3.3 Deeds to all units, including market rate units, shall include reference to the Association, and the Association's authority to impose maintenance fees and to enforce the rules and regulations of the Association. 3.4 Affordable units and middle-income units shall be distributed throughout the development, and they shall be constructed in a ratio of not less than one (1) affordable/middle-income unit to every three (3) market rate units until all units are sold. The proposed locations and building types for the affordable and middle-income units must be submitted to the ZBA for approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. 3.5 If the project generates a Development Fee in excess of 15% of Total Development Cost as determined by the final and approved Cost Certification, all such monies shall be divided between the Applicant and the Town of Nantucket evenly on a 50-50 basis. 3.5.1 The Town's share of any funds received pursuant to 3.5 above shall be used to support affordable housing initiatives and will be administered by the Nantucket Housing Office, or in the event that it does not exist at the time, by another agency designated by the Town. 3.5.2 These Town funds shall be divided evenly for use in supporting affordable housing initiatives with 50°x6 targeted for households earning less that 80% of the area median income, and 50% units targeted to households earning up to 150% of median income. 3.5.3 For the purposes of calculating whether a Development Fee greater than 15% has been generated by the project, the final approved Cost Certification will be used. The Applicant agrees for the purposes of Cost Certification that: a) expenses in the line item for Administra- tivetOverhead will be capped at $250,000 or such other greater or lesser amount as may be approved by MassHousing but in no case shall the amount be greater than $300,000; b) that expenses in the line item for Construction Administration will be capped at $250,000 or such lesser amount as may be approved by MassHousing, except that if the Applicant serves as its own Construction Contractor, and thereby creates an "identity of interest' as determined by DHCD, that this Construction Administration line item will be eliminated; c) that if the Applicant serves as its own Construction Contractor then certain construction cost line items normally regulated by DHCD in "identity of interest" circumstances, including General Requirements, Builder's General Overhead and Builder's Profit and any other such line items as determined by DHCD will be limited to the amounts defined by DHCD; and 4) that if the Applicant serves as its own marketing agent, that the Marketing line item, including advertising, will be capped at 5°% of sales of market rate units, and 3°% of sales of middle-income and affordable units; plus third party direct costs for promotional brochures and mailers, visual models, 14 displays and video presentations, furnishings for model units, and the like, such costs not to exceed $100,000. 3.5.4 In the event that the Applicant wishes to perform any other services in relation to the development of this project not listed in 3.5.3 above, then it shall notify the ZBA and will negotiate in good faith an "identity of interest" agreement for said service along the lines of the services described in 3.5.3 above. The general guideline shall be that the cost of any services provided by the Applicant shall be consistent with industry standards. 3.5.5 If the project generates a Development Fee such that the total Development Fee exceeds 20% of Total Development Cost as determined by the final and approved Cost Certification, 100°x6 of all such Development Fees in excess of 20% shall be contributed to the Town in accordance with MGL 40B guidelines and shall be used as described in 3.5.2. 4. Construction 4.1 Prior to the application for a building permit for any dwelling unit, the Applicant shall submit the following information and/or plans for approval by the ZBA: a.) Definitive Subdivision Plan (see 1.4), suitable for recording, showing all lots with metes and bounds descriptions, common driveway easements, utility easements, drainage and swale easements (if applicable), and 50 -foot building setback line from the easterly and westerly property lines of the site shown thereon. Separate sheets shall show the minimum setbacks, proposed building footprints, building style or types on all lots (see 2.5) identifying affordable and middle-income units, garages, and parking areas identifying impervious surfaces on each of the 40 house lots and all structures, decks, and the overall layout of the clubhouse/pool /tennis court lot. b.) Roadway Plan or Plans showing cross-sections, grade, bicycle plans and specifications and drainage details. C.) Utility Plan or Plans showing all electric, cable television, telephone, public water, and other infrastructure on site. d.) Sewer Plan and Profile showing both the sewer line to be constructed within the site and off-site. e.) Final Grading and Erosion Control Plan. f.) Final Architectural Plans of all structures (see 1.4). g.) Landscape and Planting Plan. (see 1.4) The landscaping plan shall be designed to achieve the most attractive appearance, screening and sound buffering that is practical. The final landscaping plan shall screen parking areas as viewed from the street and along common driveways, to the extent feasible. In addition to other minimum requirements related to landscaping herein, a minimum of one deciduous tree per lot, 41 in total, shall be provided as street trees along Roads °A" an "B". A planting chart identifying species, sizes and quantities of trees and other plant materials and a maintenance schedule shall also be submitted. h.) Lighting Plan. (see 1.4 and 3.2 j) 15 i.) Outline Building Specifications for all units indicating, if applicable, any differences among market rate and affordable/middle income units. j.) Legal documents in their final draft form including Association By-laws, Deed Rider, Regulatory Agreement, Declaration of Restrictions and Covenant. k.) All permits required by 1.9. I.) A construction mitigation/phasing plan (see 4.5). M.) Clubhouse, pool, tennis court hours of operation and guidelines (see 3.2 0.) n.) Proposed Association budget identifying all estimated Association fees for the affordable, middle-income, and market units. The ZBA shall make a determination whether the plans and information above are consistent with the Applicant's representations to the ZBA during the Public Hearing and the materials submitted by the Applicant into the record of the Public Hearing. 4.2 The Applicant, at its expense or with the contribution of other parties, shall design to Town of Nantucket specifications, and seek State and Department of Public Works approval for, and construct, a connection to the municipal sewer system which will service the site. This system is projected to consist of an internal sewer network serving the 40 dwelling units and clubhouse, 12 (twelve) -inch sewer line to be constructed along the westerly side of Fairgrounds Road from Newtown Road (a.k.a New Town Road) to a manhole approximately 250 feet north of the Rotary. At Newtown Road (a.k.a. New Town Road), the existing eight -inch sewer line must be capped off. Upon completion and acceptance of these improvements, the Applicant shall promptly convey the sewer line to the Town. An easement covering all portions of the sewer line within the site shall also be granted to the Town. No septic systems shall be allowed within the subject property. 4.3 The Applicant shall construct at its expense, with the assistance of the Wanna- comet Water Company, a new water main and a loop of supply pipe sized to service through the site and Scott's Way, between Road "B` and Fairgrounds Road. The water system shall have sufficient capacity to service other properties to the east of the site along Rugged Road and all of Scott's Way. This water main and loop shall contain fire hydrants as required by the Nantucket Fire Department, and shall be designed to Wannacomet Water Company and State specifications. Upon completion and acceptance of these improvements, the Applicant shall promptly convey the improvements to the Town. An easement covering all portions of the water line within the site shall also be granted to the Town. No water supply wells shall be allowed within the subject property. 4.4 The Applicant agrees to construct at its expense a bicycle path running parallel to Scott's Way connecting Roads "A" and "B" with the Fairgrounds Road Bicycle Path. 4.5 Prior to the start of construction, the Applicant shall submit a description and location of plans for the staging of equipment, construction materials, parking and soil stockpiles incorporated in the required construction/mitigation-phasing plan. Said plans shall be reviewed by the ZBA's engineering consultant, at the expense of the Applicant, and shall be acceptable to the ZBA. 16 4.6 The Applicant shall incorporate measures to control erosion, sedimentation, and dust during construction in the plans to the satisfaction of the ZBA's engineering consultant. 4.7 Prior to the start of construction, a pre -construction meeting shall be held among the Applicant; the Applicant's contractors; utility company representatives; the Board's representatives; representatives of the DPW and the Wannacomet Water Company; and the ZBA's engineering consultant who will be involved in the inspection of the road and drainage improvements. The Applicant shall select and have on-site a Project Representative responsible for on-site activities acceptable to the ZBA. 4.8 The traffic mitigation contribution of $35,555 (see III D 3. [c] ) shall be deposited in a segregated account prior to the issuance of a building permit, administered by the ZBA or its designee, for traffic mitigation measures within a one -mile radius of the site. 4.9 The Applicant shall install at its own expense, the improvements stated herein. Building permits shall be issued based upon a review of the progress of infrastructure installment. A Planning Board "Fort JA release from the covenant shall be submitted by the Applicant. An exception to this requirement is hereby granted to the Applicant who is allowed to construct two (2) structures as marketing models only and not for occupancy. The Planning Board has agreed to lend staff assistance to the ZBA and the ZBA hereby designates them as their agent to oversee and administer the completion of improvements in the same manner that it oversees subdivision improvements approved by the Planning Board. 4.10 The construction of road and drainage improvements cited in this Decision, shall be inspected by the ZBA's engineering consultant. The cost for such inspection shall be the responsibility of the Applicant in accordance with the standard protocol for such inspections required by the Planning Board for subdivisions. 4.11 There shall be no construction activity on Sundays and legal holidays. All exterior construction activity shall not begin prior to 7:30 am nor continue after 6:00 pm on weekdays. All exterior construction activity shall not begin prior to 8:00 am nor continue after 5:00 pm on Saturdays. 4.12 Following completion of the road, bicycle path and drainage improvements described above, the Applicant shall prepare at its own expense as -built plans, which shall be reviewed and approved by the ZBA's engineering consultant. These plans shall document substantial compliance with the specifications of the improvements required by the ZBA. 17 (051-03, RUGGED SCOTT LLC) Upon consideration of a duly made motion, the ZBA APPROVES AND GRANTS, BY A UNANIMOUS VOTE, the Comprehensive Permit, subject to the conditions included herewith on this 25th day of May, 2004. NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS �G Edward J.11anhird. Chaff ani Richard David .Wiley I hereby certify that notice of approval of this application for a COMPREHENSIVE PERMIT submitted by Rugged Scott LLC. to the Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals was received and recorded at this office on and that no appeal was received during the twenty (20) days next after such receipt and recording of said notice. Attest: Catherine Flanagan Stover, Town Clerk 18 �EX41131T G RUGGED SCOTT NANTUCKET, MA February 13, 2004 40 UNITS CAPITAL COST PROFORMA Total Costs Per Unit Per % Sq Foot of TDC (a) Land Acquisition $1,683,000 $42,075 $22.56 9.0% Hard Costs: (b) Site Work 1. Roads, drives, utilities, site clearing $1,106,666 $27,667 $14.84 5.9% 2. House lot improvements (utilities, drives, $600,000 $15,000 $8.04 3.2% walks, foundation hole and grade) 3. Landscape plantings and hardscape $320,000 $8,000 $4.29 1.7% (c) Clubhouse and Pool $400,000 $10,000 $5.36 2.1% (d) Residential Construction $10,636,534 $265,913 $142.60 56.9% (e) Subtotal Hard Costs (b+c+d) $13,063,200 $326,580 $175.13 69.9% (f) Hard Cost Contingency 5% $653,160 $16,329 $8.76 3.5% (g) Total Hard Costs (e + f) $13,716,360 342,9091 $183.89 73.4% Soft Costs: Architectural [% of (e) above] 1.2.5_% $163,290 $4,082 $2.19 0.9% Engineering $140,000 $3,5001 $1.88 0.7% _ Permits/Backcharges [% of (e) above] 1% $130,632 $3,266 $1.75 0.7% Legal Fees/Title $200,000 $5,000 $2.68 1.1% Construction Administration $190,000 $4,750 $2.55 1.0% Monitoring Agent/Lottery $45,000 $1,125 $0.60 0.2% Appraisal Fees $10,000 $250 $0.13 0.1% Accounting Fees $15,000 $375 $0.20 0.1% Liability/Builder's Risk Ins rance $33,320 $833 $0.45 0.2% Real Estate Taxes (during construction) $40,000 $1,000 $0.54 0.2% Marketing (Market Units) _ 5% $890,500 $22,263 $11.94 4.8% Marketing (Nantucket Resident Units) 3% $42,000 $1,050 $0.56 0.2% Marketing (Affordable Units) _ 1.5% $33,975 $849 $0.46 0.2% Financing Costs $80,000 $2,000 $1.07 0.4% Construction Interest $440,000 $11,000 $5.90 2.4% Unit Closing Costs/Legal $40,000 $1,000 $0.54 0.2% Maintenance Costs during Sellout $120,000 $3,000 $1.61. 0.6% Permitting Period Carrying Costs $300,000 $7,500 $4.02 1.6% Project Overhead/Administration _ $240,000 $6,000 $3.22 1.3% (h) Subtotal Soft Costs $3,153,717 $78,843 $42.28 16.9% (i) Contingency (% of Subtotal - Marketing) 6% $131,235 $3,281 $1.761 0.7% (j) Total Soft Costs (h + i) $3,284,952 $82,124 $44.041 17.6% k Total Development Costs a + + ' $18,684,312 $467,108 $250.49 100.0% Pro Forma DEVELOPMENT FEE ANALYSIS Revenue: Affordable projected sales $2,265,000 Nantucket Resident sales $1,400,000 Market projected sales $17.810.000 (A) Total Revenue $21,475,000 Expenses: (B) Total Development Costs $18,684,312 Development Fee: (C) Total Profit (A-B) $2,790,688 (D) Percentage Profit (C/B) 14.94% PROJECT DESCRIPTION Total Units 40 Residential Construction Cost per Sq Ft $142.60 Affordable Units 10 Nantucket Resident Units 4 Market Units 26 Average 40 Posner Size Average Affordable Unit 1,400 Square Feet 1500 Average Nantucket Resident Unit 1,400 Square Feet 1525 Average Market Unit 2,115 Square Feet 2059 Total Gross Square Footage 74,590 Gross Square Footage Average/Unit 1,864.75 _ Average Sales Revenue Units Average Price Revenue Posner Assumed Estimate Affordable Units 10 $226,500 $2,265,000 1 $226,500 Nantucket Resident Units 4 $350,000 $1,400,000 $350,000 Market Units 26 $685,000 $17.810.000 $660,941 40 $21,475,000 Marchant (2/13/04) Pro Forma Exhibit D ZBA File 51-03 Rugged Scott LLC Clubhouse/Pool/Lawn/Tennis Facilitv Non-Resident Eligibili N May 25, 2004 E X HI§O/ P & 8288 8® 2 %\kms /\ � LL 888 82 ® RSS S& ®-- 2 & 88�E 8p © 2 Cj 2 Q 2 I � 2LL a0k A_ kk 1*2_ k k < o00o Cl 0 00 I o oilo000 ® 2��2 > � E Ja aoeo t\ kU- 0 �0 2 7 2� /g N Vo# o¢ ACL 2 CM mg0 « %28 CO �§C CO _ k §kk 28888 e % e a 22E �� *n*� f��cd�20 2 ama to 'on �- ® §fI,§ �X 00o RBR 2■ C-4 C,4 Cgeo �7f 2�� o000 �kCM W3 V) 2 _daddy =oma k©# e 1-4 =1 < @ 2 © t §g�E � E <ZD o <e@L e6 0 r3 e e e_ 06 CL OL CL _ o k B E a© e $ aG �q�o/ &&&& �$ © o■ Mee- e $7 k� Hdkkk k� ��d/�< ®w®+ < COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS NANTUCKET, SS. SUPERIOR COURT DOCKET NO. 04-15 LISA P. DIAS, KENNETH F. DIAS and LISA P. DIAS, TRUSTEES, of DAISEY NOMINEE TRUST, and PETER PAUL MEERBERGEN, and NANTUCKET LAND COUNCIL, INC., PLAINTIFFS, V. TOWN OF NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, EDWARD J. SANFORD, CHAIRMAN, C. RICHARD LOFTIN, EDWARD MURPHY, NANCY J. SEVRENS, DAVID R. WILEY, MICHAEL J. O'MARA, DALE W. WAINE and EDWARD S. TOOLE, as members thereof, and RUGGED SCOTT, LLC., DEFENDANTS. STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL Plaintiffs, Lisa P. Dias, Kenneth F. Dias and Lisa P. Dias, Trustees of Daisey Nominee Trust, Peter Paul Meerbergen and Nantucket Land Council, Inc., by and through their undersigned attorneys, and pursuant to the Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 41, hereby stipulate to the dismissal of the above styled action, with prejudice, and without costs. FILED DEC 2 9 2005 NANTUCKET SUPERIOR t O iii r;LERK CU C Dated: December, 2005 PLAINTIFFS, Lisa P. Dias, Kenneth F. Dias and Lisa P. Dias, Trustees of Daisey Nominee Trust, and Peter Paul Meerbergen, By TheirAttomey, VU . Guay, Esquire fside Road ox 1294 ket, Massachusetts 02554-1294 Telephone: 508-825-9099 Facsimile: 508-825-9199 B.B.O. No.: 551814 PLAINTIFF, Nantucket Land Council, Inc. By Its A�y, Mer R. Fenn, Esquire Peter R. Fenn and Associates 71 South Street Jamaica Plain, Massachusetts 02130 Telephone: 617-522-9292 Facsimile: 617-522-4120 B.B.O. No.: 162720 DEFENDANT, Town of Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals, By Its Attorney, Kimberly M. Saillant, Esquire Deutsch Williams Brooks DeRensis & Holland 99 Summer Street Boston, Massachusetts 02110 Telephone: 617-951-2300 Facsimile: 617-951-2323 B.B.O. No.: 548775 Dated: December � 1, 2005 PLAINTIFFS, Lisa P. Dias, Kenneth F. Dias and Lisa P. Dias, Trustees of Daisey Nominee Trust, and Peter Paul Meerbergen, By Their Attorney, Joseph M. Guay, Esquire 108 Surfside Road P.O. Box 1294 Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554-1294 Telephone: 508-825-9099 Facsimile: 508-825-9199 B.B.O. No.: 551814 PLAINTIFF, Nantucket Land Council, Inc. By Its Attorney, Peter R. Fenn, Esquire Peter R. Fenn and Associates 71 South Street Jamaica Plain, Massachusetts 02130 Telephone: 617-522-9292 Facsimile: 617-522-4120 B.B.O. No.: 162720 of NantuSket Zobing Board of Appeals, Its Kimber Brooks DeRensis & Holland 99 SumStr et .*r Boston, assdchusetts 02110 Telephone: 617-951-2300 V Facsimile: 617-951-2323 B.B.O. No.: 548775 DEFENDANT, Rugged Scott, LLC, by Its Attorney, Peter L. Freeman, Esquire Freeman Law Group 1597 Falmouth Road, Suite 3 Centerville, Massachusetts 02632 Telephone: 508-775-5010 Facsimile: 508-775-9105 B.B.O. No.: 179140 TOWN OF NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 1 EAST CHESTNUT STREET NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554 PHONE 508-228-7215 FAX 508-228-7205 NOTICE A Public Hearing of the NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS will be held at 10:00 A.M., FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 2006, Conference Room, Town Annex, 37 Washington Street, Nantucket, Massachusetts, on the Application of the following: RUGGED SCOTT LLC BOARD OF APPEALS FILE NO. 051-03 The Board granted relief in the Decision in BOA File No. 051-03 on an Application for a Comprehensive Permit under Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 40B, Sections 20 — 23. Applicant is allowed to construct 40 free standing single-family units (with eight being restricted to affordable units) on a vacant 10 -acre parcel of land running between Rugged Road and Scott's Way, approximately 500 feet east of Fairgrounds Road. The homes will be arranged around a central village green and community building. The matter is now before the Board pursuant to the conditions contained in the aforementioned Decision for final Board review of various plans, including but not limited to, HDC submissions, final site plan (including final landscape plan and building locations), definitive subdivision plan, roadway plan, utility plan, sewer/drainage plan, final grading and erosion control, lighting plan, deed riders/covenants, homeowners association by-laws, construction mitigation/phasing plan and approvals from state entities, as well as consideration of provisions contained in litigation settlement agreement document for formal inclusion in the Decision. The Applicant further requests that Condition 2.6 of the Decision be modified by removing the requirement that all lots have frontage of a minimum 20 feet on a road or way (Section 139-16A, Intensity regulations — frontage). There will be an opportunity for public review of the project and new submissions at the ZBA office at 1 East Chestnut Street and for public comment and submission of comments to the ZBA for review during the public hearing process. The Premises is located at 15 and 19 RUGGED ROAD; 6 and 8 SCOTT'S WAY; Assessor's Map 67, Parcels 170, 170.1, 170.2 and 170.3; Plan Book 21, Page 106, Lots 19A, 19B, 19C and 19D. The property is zoned Limited -Use -General -2. Dale Waine, Chairman THIS NOTICE IS AVAILABLE IN LARGE PRINT OR OTHER ALTERNATIVE FORMATS. PLEASE CALL 508-228-7215 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION. NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 1 EAST CHESTNUT STREET NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554 FEE: $300.00 CASE NO. 051-03 APPLICATION FOR RELIEF Owner's name(s): Rugged Scott, LLC Mailing address: c/o Reade, Gullicksen, Hanley & Gifford, LLP Applicant's name(s): Same Mailing address: 6 Young's Way, Post Office Box 2669, Nantucket, Massachusetts 02584 Locus address: 15 and 19 Rugged Road; 6 and 8 Scott's Way Assessor's Map/Parcel: 67-170, 170.1, 170.2, 170.3 Plan Book & Page: 21-106 Lot No.: 19A. 19B, 19C, 19D Date lot acquired:_/ / Deed Ref.: 761-53 Zoning District: LUG -2 State below or on a separate addendum specific relief sought (Special Permit, Variance, Appeal), Section of the Zoning By-law, and supporting details, grounds for grant of relief, listing any existing nonconformities: The applicant requests that the Comprehensive Permit in this matter be modified by striking the second sentence of Paragraph 2.6, and by inserting in place thereof the following language: Except as otherwise shown upon the Definitive Plan, or other plan endorsed by this Board in this matter, each lot shall have a minimum frontage of 20 feet upon a road or way. The applicant proposes to reconfigure the boundaries between Lots 9 and 10; between Lots 22 and 23; between Lots 25 and 26; between Lots 27 and 28; between Lots 29 and 30; and between Lots 39 and 40; with the result that Lots 9, 22, 25, 28, 29 and 39 would no longer have frontage upon a road or way. This request for modification is being filed pursuant to 760 CMR 31.01(3)(a), and the applicant respectfully requests that it be treated as an insubstantial change pursuant to 760 CMR 31. 03 (3) (b) . By making this request for modification, the Applicant does not waive any of its rights under the existing Comprehensive Permit, as modified, any and all of which are expressly reserved. I certify that the information contained herein is substantially complete and true to the best of my knowledge, under the pain d nalties of p 'ury. SIGNATURE: Applicant Attorney/Agent (If not owner or owne s attorney, please enclose proof of agency to bring this matter before the Board) FO F ICE USE Application received onA/�% y: Complete: Need copies?: Filed with Town Clerk:! f lannin _,u,.wj_ By: Fee deposited with Town Treasurer: By: Wive req ested?: ra ted: / Hearing notice posted with Town Clerk. �!� ailed:/j &M: Hearing(s) held on: /_/_ Opened on: _/_/-Continued to:—/ /_Wit draw ?:—/—/ DECISION DUE BY:_//_ Made:_//_ Filed w/Town Clerk: Mailed:—/—/ Mailed:_/_/ DECISION APPEALED?_ / / SUPERIOR_ COURT: LAND COURT Form 4/03/03 File No. 051- -03 TOWN OF NANTUCKET BOARD OF APPEALS NANTUCKET, MA 02554 Map 67 Parce1823 Print Form RECEIVED 205 `ink; 2 F; 2` G2 Hi,.NTI U- E -T T�. E` This agreement to extend the time limit for the Board of Appeals to make a decision, hold a public hearing, or to take other action concerning the Application of.- RUGGED f: RUGGED SCOTT LLC - Site Plan Modification/Model swap on Lots 24 & 27 Pursuant to the provisions of the Acts of 1987, Chapter 498, amending the State Zoning Act, Chapter 40A of the Massachusetts General Laws, Applicants)/Petitioner(s) and the Zoning Board of Appeals hereby agree to extend the time limit • For a public hearing on the application O For a written decision O For other action Such application is: O An appeal from the decision of any administrative official O A petition for a special permit O A petition for a variance O An extension • A modification The new time limit shall be midnight on November 12, 2015 , which is not earlier than a time limit set by statute or bylaw. The Applicant (s), attorney, or agent for the Applicant represented to be duly authorized to act in this matter for the applicant, in exe agreement waives any rights under the Nantucket Zoning Bylaw and the State Toning Act, as o the extent, but only to the extent, inconsistent with this agreement. fcv �— For Ap}lli t (s) For Zoning Board of Appeals F Town Clerk Stamp: Vfm4fg I. Z `/ j Effective Date of Agreement 2 Fairgrounds Road Nantucket Massachusetts 02554 508-228-7215 telephone 508-228-7298 facsimile Print Form 71 N A N i U C K E' T() NN CLEF' 2011 APR 25 PM 2= 59- TOWN °TOWN OF NANTUCKET BOARD OF APPEALS NANTUCKET, MA 02554 F'dc No. 051 03 flap 67 Parcelsol This agreement to extend the time limit for the Board of Appeals Io make a decision, hold a public hearirig, or to take other action concerning the application of- RUGGED f RUGGED SCOTT, LLC - Beach Plum Villaqe 40B - Lot 2;3 Wood Lily Rd. Pursuant to the provisions of the Acts of 1987, Chapter 498, amendmg the State Zoning Act, Chapter 40A of the Massachu-M General Laws, Applic&nt(s)/Petitioner(s) and the Zoning Board of Appeals here-hc agree to extend the tune limit O I -or a public hearing on the application O For a written decision 0 For other actin E2guest assent of Board of Appeals to amend Exhibit Ain the llei:Lmtion of Restrictions and basements to allow 4 bedrooms in the house on Lot Such application is: o An appeal from the decision of any administrative offtasl r� A petition for a special permit. O A petitionfor a variance O An extensx>n • A modification to the Comprehensive Permit, as previously amended, to alluw increase in = of bedrooms in a house The new time liv it shall be midnight on May 11,21717 a tune liiiiit set by statute or bylaw. which u, not earlier than The Applicant (s), attorney, or agent for the Applicant represented to be duly authorized to act in this hatter for the applicant, in executing this agreement waives any rights tinder the Nantuckct Zoning By6w and the State Zoom ,1ct, as an Jcd, to the extent, but only to the extent, inconsistent with this agrCement. Eleanor W. Antonietti, Zoning Administrator For Zoning I3cr of Appcals April 16, 2017 Town clerk Siamp: F.ffcctivc !laic of ;4grccmrnt — _ 2 l'.tic.��a,undn R—d Nantuckct Mw;"chuacros 02FA4 3: 2 - TOWN OF NANTUCKET BOARD OF APPEALS NANTUCKET, MA 02554 File No. 051 03 Map 67 Parcels 828 This agreement to extend the time limit for the Board of Appeals to make a decision, hold a public hearing, or to take other action concerning the application of. RUGGED SCOTT- LT Beach Plum Village 2 Blue Flag Path of 291 Pursuant to the provisions of the Acts of 1987, Chapter 498, amending the State Zoning Act, Chapter 40B of the Massachusetts General Laws, and 760 CMR 56, Applicants)/Petitioner(s) and the Zoning Board of Appeals hereby agree to extend the time limit O For a public hearing on the application O For a written decision o Extend 180 day period to close a public hearing • For other action Make a determination that the requested Modification re. 2 Blue Flag Path is insubstantial pursuant to 760 CMR 56.05 (11)(a)(b) Such application is: o A Comprehensive Permit O An appeal from the decision of any administrative official O A petition for a special permit o A petition for a variance O An extension • A modification to a Comprehensive Permit The new time limit shall be midnight on �� 2� ! which is not earlier than a time limit set by statute or bylaw. The Applicant (s), attorney, or agent for the Applicant represented to be duly authorized to act in this matter for the applicant, in executing this a Bement waives any rights under the Nantucket Zoning Bylaw and the State Zoning Act, as amended, to#extent, but only to the exte� inconsis�t with this agreement. A For Applicant (s) Eleanor Weller Antonietti Zoning_ Administrator For Zoning Board of Appeals June 13 2019 Effective Date of Agreement Town Clerk Stamp: 2 Fairgrounds Road Nantucket Massachusetts 02554 508-228-7215 telephone 508-228-7298 facsimile ti 2021 FC-V _ ?' ^ - y L y /' {F TOWN OF NANTUCKET BOARD OF APPEALS NANTUCKET, MA 02554 MEMORANDUM Date: February 5, 2021 To: Town Clerk From: Eleanor Weller Antonietti, Zoning Administrator Re: File No. 51-03 —INSUBSTANTIAL MODIFICATION to Comprehensive Permit Rugged Scott—Beach Plum Village 40B —Bedroom count swap Lot 8 (9 Wood Lily Road) & Lot 9 (6 Fox Grape Lane) The above referenced Comprehensive Permit was granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals to Rugged Scott LLC, filed with the Town Clerk on February 13, 2006, and recorded at Book 1010. Page 1 with the Nantucket Registry of Deeds. At its meeting on January 14, 2021. the Zoning Board of Appeals made a determination that a previously approved modification may be ratified and deemed insubstantial. Please file the attached letter detailing this approval with the original Comprehensive Permit File No. 051-03. Thank you. Eleanor W. Antonietti. Zoning Administrator COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS County of Nantucket, ss TJI On the Lday of Feb CL , 2021, before me, the undersigned notary public. personall�- appeared Eleanor W. Antoniettiothe above-named Zoning Administrator of Nantucket. Massachusetts, personally known to me to be the person whose name is signed on the preceding document, and acknowledged that she signed the foregoing instrument voluntarily for the purposes ther-•• expressed. /14 - L.4[�� PAUL M. MURPHY Official Signature and Seal of Nota r'' • c l NOTARY=Usuc Comrionweaifc,Of Massachusetts My commission expires: My commission Expires December 17,2021 — �+ 2 Fairgrounds Road Nantucket Massachusetts 02554 508 - 228 - 7215 telephone 508 - 228 - 7298 facsimile Oonice r„c. Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals z. ".!PaRA�EO January 28, 2021 rz Nancy Holmes Town & County Clerk - 16 Broad Street Nantucket, MA 02554-3590 Re: INSUBSTANTIALMODIFICATIQN Rugged Scott 40B Lot 9; Plan No. 2006-61 Map 67, Parcel 808 6 Fox Grape Lane Lot 8; Plan No. 2006-61 Map 67, Parcel 807 9 Wood Lily Road Dear Town Clerk Holmes: 1 The above-referenced architectural modification relates to lots created as part of the Rugged Scott LLC 40B Project as granted by the Decision in Zoning Board of Appeals File No. 051- 03, known as the "Comprehensive Permit for the Rugged Scott LLC Development". A copy of said Decision, two subsequent "Clarification and Technical Correction" decisions issued in 2008, as well as various other substantial and insubstantial modifications, are on file with your department. At the Zoning Board of Appeals ("the Board") meeting on January 14, 2021, David S. Gesner and Julie A. Gesner, owners of 6 Fox Grape Lane by virtue of deed recorded at Book 1611, Page 116, requested a ratification of a prior approval regarding a proposed modification to the construction program upon Lots 8 and 9. Said approval constituted a determination that the proposal was considered to be an insubstantial modification to the Comprehensive Permit, as amended, and the plans approved therewith, pursuant to 760 CMR 56.05 (11)(a)(b), and as such, may be authorized by the Board to formalize the determination made in 2006. 2 Fair};rounds /toad • Nantucket, MA 0255 508,228 —215 telephone • 508,2 28 -298 facsimile 4,-4,04TUCIrFr Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals \ g 9POHAS��/- .F The proposed modification for which the applicant sought and received ratified approval is: ■ To the extent necessary, regarding Lots 8 and 9: o Modification to the Comprehensive Permit confirming that the bedroom count upon Lot 8 is three and the bedroom count upon Lot 9 is four, said change brought about by the swapping of architectural house models between the two lots. Furthermore, and to the extent necessary, Applicant requests the assent of the Zoning Board of Appeals to amend the Declaration of Restrictions and Easements, so as to effectuate and memorialize the foregoing request. Section 760 CMR 56.05 (11)(a)(b), for your reference, reads in relevant part: (11) Changes after Issuance of a Permit. (a) If after a Comprehensive Permit is granted by the Board, including by order of the Committee pursuant to 760 CMR 56.07(5), an Applicant desires to change the details of its Project as approved by the Board or the Committee, it 2 shall promptly notify the Board in writing, describing such change. Within 20 days the Board shall determine and notify the Applicant whether it deems the change substantial or insubstantial, with reference to the factors set forth at 760 CMR 56.07(4). (b) If the change is determined to be insubstantial or if the Board fails to notify the Applicant by the end of such 20-day period, the Comprehensive Permit shall be deemed modified to incorporate the Change. The Applicant was represented by Attorney Rick Beaudette at the meeting. Mr. Beaudette explained the history and nature of this request. The review of the initial request for approval of"reversal of the house designs" entailing a swap of bedroom allowance between Lots 8 and 9 took place in August - September 2006. Such a request triggers the need for the Board to approve the request and assent to an amendment to the Declaration of Restrictions and Easements ("Declaration"), recorded with the Registry of Deeds at Book 1010, Page 78, and executed on February 24, 2006. At the time of the issuance of the original Comprehensive Permit, Lot 8 was restricted to four bedrooms and Lot 9 was restricted to three bedrooms pursuant to Article 3.19 and the table found on "Exhibit A" of said Declaration. Section 7.01 of the Declaration allows for 2 Fairgrounds Road . N:tntucia_t, X1A t)255 500 228 -215 tcicpiwnc• • ;08,228 298 Licsiiiiik apNTUCKF Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals -�k � `.N — \ amendments by the developer, Rugged Scott, LLC, as long as it still owns any of the lots which was the case at the time of the request. Therefore, the developer had the ability to amend the restriction regarding the number of bedrooms on any of the lots, as long as the Board consented to the amendment,which they appear to have done per the documentation provided by the Applicant and the issuance of Certificates of Occupancy for both lots. These materials are submitted in support of this request and attached herewith as "EXHIBIT A". The difficulty encountered in verifying the Board's decision in 2006 is a result of an inability to locate the minutes from that time period. The Zoning Administrator at the time took minutes by hand, the transcript of which would eventually be typed up and filed with the Town Clerk. These notes and/or transcriptions are missing from the files. However, the approval is borne out by the issuance of Building Permits that confirm the bedroom count as well as Assessor's records which affirm the bedroom counts. After examining the materials and discussion, the Board made and unanimously passed the motion to ratify the prior 2006 determination that a proposed swap of house models and corresponding bedroom counts between Lot 8 (9 Wood Lily) and Lot 9 (6 Fox 3 Grape) may be considered an insubstantial modification to the Comprehensive Permit because it will not change the overall allowed bedroom count. Accordingly, the Comprehensive Permit and the plans approved therewith are deemed duly modified to reflect this change. The Board further moved to authorize the Chair to sign the assent to the amendment of"Exhibit A" of the Declaration of Restrictions and Easements, so as to effectuate and memorialize the change in the number of bedrooms for Lot 8 to 3 and the number of bedrooms for Lot 9 to 4. SIGI PAG T F OW 2 Fairgrounds Rotel • Nantucket, MA 0. 551 7118.?8 —215 telephone • i08.228 -2198 facsimile -, NapTuc,r;›,:• Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals4,y =.,9paRA��,v INSUBSTANTIAL MODIFICATION Rugged Scott / Beach Plum Village 40B Lot 9: Plan No. 2006-61 Map 67, Parcel 808 6 Fox Grape Lane Lot 8: Plan No. 2006-61 Map 67, Parcel 807 9 Wood Lily Road Dated: January 14, 2021 Susan McCarthy COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS 4 Nantucket, ss. fir bru� ✓ On the day of , 2021, before me, the undersigned notary public, personally appeared c5 tii't.J &Zay L- , one of the above- named members of the Zoning Board of Appeals of Nantucket, Massachusetts, personally known to me to be the person whose name is signed on the preceding document, and acknowledged that they signed the foregoing instrument as their free act and deed and voluntarily for the purposes therein expressed. (i.aoy. ,,,,,, Official Signature and Seal of otary Pu lic My commission expires: Illbribidibitillribialle 0 PAUL M. MURPHY ! ' NOTARY PUBLIC 1 Commonwealth Of Massachusetts 0 I \`1 My Commission Expires December 17,2021 2 Fairgrounds lto.td • Nantucket, MA 0255 i 5418,228 -215 telephone • 508,228 -298 facsimile EXHIBIT A RUGGED SCOTT 051 .03 Bedroom Count VAUGHAN,DALE,HUNTER,BEAUDETTE AND SWAIN PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION ATTORNEYS AT LAW WHALER'S LANE P.O.Box 659 EDWARD FOLEY VAUGHAN NANTUCKET,MASSACHUSETTS 02554 WILLIAaf F.HUNTER KEVIN F.DALE — OF COUNSEL RICHARD P.BEAUDETTE TEL:15081228-4455 BRYAN J.SWAIN FAX(5081228.3070 December 23, 2020 VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL Zoning Board of Appeals, Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals Eleanor W. Antonietti, Administrator 2 Fairgrounds Road DEC 2 4 202E Nantucket, MA 02554 DEC 2 8 20211 A RECEIVED I CD Re: David and Julie Gesner - 6 Fox Grape Lane,Nantucket, MA 02554 Request for an insubstantial modification to Beach Plum 40(B) Comprehensive Permit Dear Eleanor: On behalf of David and Julie Gesner, owners of 6 Fox Grape Lane, Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 (the "Premises") desire to confirm the bedroom count on the Premises (the "Request"). The Applicants are seeking a determination from the Zoning Board of Appeals that the Request is an insubstantial modification to the Beach Plum 40(B) Comprehensive Permit, as amended of record. To that end, enclosed please find an application for such, together with supporting documentation. Enclosed please also find a check in the amount of$450.00 made payable to the Town of Nantucket representing the filing fee. Thank you for your attention to this matter, please do not hesitate to call me should you have any questions or concerns. Sincerely, Richard P. Beaudette, Esq. CC: Attorney Gordon Meyer Encs. • PAID PRP DEC 2 8 2020 iii c,; TOWN OF NANTUCKET BOARD OF APPEALS Zoning Board of Appeals NANTUCKET, MA 02554 DEC 2 4 2020 APPLICATION RECEIVED Fee: $450.00 File No.51-03 Owner's name(s): GESNER DAVID S&JULIE A Mailing address:_C/O VDHB&S,2 Whalers LANE PO BOX 659 Nantucket.AM 02554 Phone Number: 508-228-4455 E-Mail: c/o ricke,,vdhlaw.com Applicant's name(s): same as above Mailing Address: same as above Phone Number: same as above E-Mail: same as above Locus Address: 67 Assessor's Map/Parcel: 808 Land Court Plan/Plan Book&Page/Plan File No.Lot 9 on Plans No.2006-19&2006-61 Deed Reference/Certificate of Title: 01611/0116 Zoning District LUG-2 Uses on Lot-Commercial:None: (describe) None Residential:Number of dwellings 1 Duplex N/A Apartments N/A Date of Structure(s):all pre-date 7/72 N/A or Building Permit Numbers: N/A Previous Zoning Board Application Numbers: N/A 2FairgroundsRoad Nantucket Massachusetts 02554 508325-7587telephone 508-228-7298faceimile State below or attach a separate addendum of specific special permits or variance relief applying for: See Addendum"A"Attached hereto. I certify that the information contained herein is substantially complete and true to the best of my knowledge,under the pains and penalties of perjury. SIGNATURE: �� /� Owner* SIGNATURE: Appplicant/Attorney/Agent* *If an Agent is representing the Owner or the Applicant,please provide a signed proof of agency. OFFICE USE ONLY Application received on_J /_.By: Complete Need Copies: Filed with Town Cledc:JJ_Planning Board:JJ_Building Dept:J J_By. Fee deposited with Town TreasurecJJ_By: Waiver requested: Granted:_/_/_Hearing notice posted with Town Cledc:JJ__Msikd:�J_ I&M—/—/__&J_/._Hearings)held on:_f_/_,Opened on Continued to:,_/_f Wwn;__/J_Decision Due By:_/_/__ Jam_ Filed w/Town ADDENDUM I. Introduction David and Julie Gesner(the"Applicant"),are the owners of 6 Fox Grape,Nantucket Town and County,Commonwealth of Massachusetts,identified as Lot 9 on Plan No.2006-19 and 2006- 61 recorded at the Nantucket Registry of Deeds(the"Plan,"a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit"A"), and is further identified as parcel 67, on Nantucket Tax Accessor's Map 808 (the "Premises"or"Parcel"). As shown in the attached letter dated August 4, 2006 by Joshua Posner, the developer, it was requested that the proposed house on the Premises(Lot 9),switch with the proposed house on Lot 8(now known as 9 Wood Lily). Attached hereto as Exhibit B. This had the effect of changing the allowed bedroom count on the Premises from 3 bedrooms to 4 bedrooms and conversely, changed the allowed bedrooms on Lot 8 from 4 bedrooms to 3 bedrooms. I also attach a copy of the agenda from August 11,2006,which shows the Rugged Scott 40B Modification Request as an agenda item. Attached hereto as exhibit C. It is our understanding and belief that this request was approved at either the August 11, 2006 hearing or the regularly scheduled September meeting of the Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals (the "Board"). However, we have been unable to fmd confirmation of the Board's decision either on record at Nantucket Registry of Deeds, within the Board's administrative files or within the minutes at the Nantucket Town Clerk. Nonetheless, as further evidence of the approval, the Premises (Lot 9) was constructed as a four (4) bedroom dwelling and received a Certificate of Occupancy on August 13,2007. Likewise, Lot 8 (9 Wood Lily)was constructed as a three(3)bedroom dwelling and received a Certificate of Occupancy on November 21,2014. The purpose of this application is to ratify the Board's prior decision and document it. In addition, the Applicant is seeking the Board's consent to amend the Declaration of Restrictions and Easements by changing the bedroom count on Lot 9 to 4 Bedrooms and by changing the bedroom count on Lot 8 to 3 bedrooms. II. Request for a determination that the proposed modification is an insubstantial modification to the Comprehensive Permit.and the plans approved therewith. Modifications to Comprehensive Permits are governed 760 CMR 56.05 (11)(a)(b),which provides in pertinent part that: "after a Comprehensive Permit is granted by the Board,an Applicant desires to change the details of its Project as approved by the Board or the Committee,it shall promptly notify the Board in writing, describing such change. Within 20 days the Board shall determine and notify the Applicant whether it deems the change substantial or insubstantial,with reference to the factors set forth at 760 CMR 56.07(4)" 760 CMR 56.07(4)(c) provides that the following matters generally will be substantial changes:(1)an increase of more than 10%in the height of the building(s);(2)an increase of more than 10%in the number of housing units proposed; (3)a reduction in the size of the site of more than 10% in excess of any decrease in the number of housing units proposed; (4) a change in building type(e.g., garden apartments,townhouses,high-rises); or(5)a change from one form of housing tenure to another. 760 CMR 56.07(4)(c) provides that the following matters generally will not be substantial changes: (1)a reduction in the number of housing units proposed; (2)a decrease of less than 10% in the floor area of individual units; (3) a change in the number of bedrooms within individual units,if such changes do not alter the overall bedroom count of the proposed housing by more than 10%; (4)a change in the color or style of materials used;or(5)a change in the financing program under which the Applicant plans to receive a Subsidy, if the change affects no other aspect of the proposal. As indicated above, insubstantial changes are generally defined as administerial modifications such as changing the number of bedrooms, building materials, financing programs, and changes to structures and bedroom counts that are less than 10%of the entire development. The Applicant's request to change the bedroom counts in the documents and in the record decisions does not expand or alter any structure,building type or building tenure on Premises,and does not affect the overall bedroom count in the development. To the contrary, it confirms the existing bedroom counts in the respective dwellings. Therefore,the Applicant respectfully requests that the Board determine that it's request to confirm the bedroom counts, is not a substantial change to the it, and further consent to the Applicant's proposed amendment to the declarati n o) f restricive tions and covenants. EXHIBIT A s Town and County of Nantucket, MA December 23,2020 492 II .� 490 • • • • 67 810 •• • 4 4/3 •• •. • 14 • • •• • • ' •• • • • • • •,'♦ � • • • ;:08 SC� • AIFFS • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • .4 C • • 67 842 •• ''_v1. • • • • • • • • : '`r • • L1LY RD • • • • yn rLQ ] • . • H • • • 10' • 4, . • I .4 . a ..• * • J~ • ,i • • • • N11, • • • • • • • • • • • \ OG •• • • 67 841 • • �' . Property Information - . . •$ ' • 1-=70 ft Property lD 67 808 .. r-; .. Location 6 FOX GRAPE LN Owner GESNP.RDAVID S6JULIE A v MAP FOR REFERENCE ONLY NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT Town and County of Nantucket MA makes no claims and no accuracy of expressed dm presented on U map.v r or Geometry updated 11/13/2018 Data updated 11/19/2018 • u t c .01-01-awt= • •mar r Or1ID 5113StYOYSYII'31mY1Y7 .",.".,! w ;l .«I ow.,,rair'' ..'a}aguarm itr'e;a�•t'i r ao:s...rw 771 YN�dOp�3O11 9MStl W iJw9II Crit >.° S113f1HYSSVV1 13717f1U1VN �.• nen n�T.. � .W.1 3.11M 10100•IU°a SK4•nnct MOP . w.=t AVM SAX ONV OYO I wng h ' I 1 y ,.,i; . I•� r a 1V 9NISf1ON Q3SOdO11d)JOA 14JPw0133A3O 3115 „,... t • +' $ - —NVId NOISIAIOBf1S 3P LLINLi34 11V213A0 : 1 : i ilJ, a i E • ■. Y.$ i fa /Q`t gy3i``�"i j3 ro t I nts K � ti a Y2 :S gt !I! !el e='=r` € ttTi IA t; I Y• • /$ 9 ' "Ili ifI ,dg fir 10. 4 1 � a $�5 Q 1. ! v a, y i 0 g i I, : tilt' :Ili i q i 6 WP lila 11i>t.... gi.$ . 5 : :E _� @ � ;011 �Rci °; ig0; �t�tl,(4 �$ t P}S 18! g $ ill;eftt 14 ; t 1 415 =41111 s, ` 1 f g & Igo $ 055 Istal r 3 8 `t ,2 • IS �` 141hi 111 Rad? g;14 slaw .1 j i i ;% ir 1 I , 2-i 3 .re c f#1 : 1I 4 ilt1 ..✓.O.; AI 0010,VtK.3.3».t.•n.m.:w.._, b" a3oone ' Fig 15 5 • aVOY ., 9 ;it :t._ A111. Weir] ,/ JYA .r _ .1at 71. ,i _ J.« til. I 1 1 : 3 4 i..... ( x r."o•x!??§5$"� •5M: j !i is iJ • t i ti mss, �� n. i 1 :us.:.tx.Fxx::a:. t t i �' ' .. iia:' 8R ^'_iR►€ca sfii i.a^� iii � � �jyt .� F� � ;-'1041." i � �e �' y � Iq .J. t s e C .� S ' '� ! $s$ 'r1!$R$r $$$$$$$$si e 5 $ v! a., , si• r l i iiti<"srx= :aa3g3te:.i i t. a s'. x,. #iA22I[J1Fbx2224e'zi g ! -.+ 7 AZ o 1 J 1111 4 F -. . I;,ivsaar': ! : 1w� f _._ ....•0....•JI, t..L�• T •!• _•,'T ... R R i. it I !� i S: •7,,.."1,1,..m 6!E i 11, rya ��..,. 1 1111 it, g $ j •Y .r„�i,• --' 1111.--Y— t Y' E . _, 1111 .. MO pET t f^� 3a - - . _a i< S 1 1itT: I , p a , E' •.•s - _-- , `Mini/ ligI 1J . 81h/WN Bili illi 1 -1 ..,. f 1 gi' 'Riga igt Ilei .1 a: S e im • CC l'0 =R 4 It o , r Ali I s . ' `"°R', ---.-- .i.•., e it 1i I' e t .q i T 0 1... @ I< 1 a 'IC.. .i.. f i i ..T... _ ° it 24 poi= t 9, tr1 h` % .e ,1_ t e. < d.� y 1 tix ill ix Sti 1 11 I 4 - t l C YRV h8l G�111 gEg i;Y < gl: 1 i `7 e i cee i rr � � $a y 1?3 xi, 11 It: t$ r y ` B - om3 � [` taut= � . _., OS Mtt vir •i AC::: ] ,[ gr3i, .1. 1.371••.[,.�t.r•J 5.110 25 e•li A YA . ! ( ._WYn O S.rc:i H I vi I . 00120 SLL311110VIVAI 1100/11PNO %MI5 ICILIWIIMI IC occVm Iaynny, gm le um. 0-n lidammIrt aram 1 --..* . .. .. . Muliital MOM ,r, in OU.3611CAISOVN .1.31NOLNVN AM&LUX*ONV OWN=env Jet. R- I --- a'3VIITIR INTld OAO 147131 WA IMONINVEN130 31.15 ,...1' -------__-- NV1 NVld incur TIVeGito - 1 - ill! x.xil gis Ar la 8 - 1 1,114$1,,ilib f i----AV i i ; lill r 1 7 . ! illig t g ill.f.gi 1 , ,w, I .111 /I Niel n 1. . . 0 i i .1 tsidg t hi i • et. ifir !LW;I. - ! . I •t •S4 4 : ili,s_ 4%. al • ' it a. I gg I I tik g JI hi igh - ii up ii A firli blabill rn leg Mi ! j IF L El J. i!ii 5 I g! • I•0 i - i 1 ill .a. I II/ ! N iIi, freer. hi H *I i • IVO& _liar All ..... , Ann I•• 3.... • r- min i , , PM =II ; r , , .1; ... ,,, ,.- ,___ iplegio ....._ •'• - .. ------ -: r 4 ' ""•• faro 3 rommon --.'- - ' 2 - — 1 _. t . -N 1 - . - -c- . ; tl n I • 1 0 id . .1•4 ; la .... i 11 1 -TM I c...s. , , : 4;.- .'' 1 i iii.41 a I it ,fr r 1 t I" tn. ' til 1 I 1 I I 1 1 :1 '•-• I r - .,.. 1 tort : • ,., 101 ift, g I 1 f .ilii. -- .... 4,‘ -1 ,, • .411- .." .41 %. ....10,- 4 I 1 ,:t. ith, . ..., :7.- 1 'llIllrilli"Illr e iA S 51 br - ..... • !4- ti g 1I , • . i • . .. .... a . a - ac ..* r .i ....... 5" , r 11 ,..O... ... iv r —if \\. , .) ..,. ..,\ („.. ................. A V ...M S. I I mom a SU a NUM= num 4330,10. .a. EXHIBIT B -Fcr • A �.� RISING Toot DEvnoM,ar LLC -� 32 ARURGTon STREET CAMBRIDGE • MAssAC ETTS • 02140 .-� 617.549.3232 TEL • 617.492.1143,IDI • 1o►paaeereaNscatl.eet BY HAND DELIVERY August 31,2006 Ms.Nancy Severns,Chair Board of Appeals Town of Nantucket 2 Fairgrounds Road Nantucket,MA 02554 Dear Ms.Severns: At the August 11 ZBA meeting you asked that I put together a package of materials to be distributed to you and the other Board members to further explain our requests for three minor modifications to our comprehensive permit for housing off Rugged Road,now called Beach Plum Village. First let me review our requests,with a brief explanation of the reason for each: 1. Request:That the homes proposed for Lots 8 and 9 be swapped for each other. Reason:A buyer wants a particular house on a different lot.The change will have no visual impact on the adjacent property. In general we try to keep potential buyers u�focused on the current plan,but in this case the request was so minor that wthought it would not be a problem. It would be very helpful to us if we could have a slightly broader discussion about how we should handle these kind of situations in the future. 2. Request:That the garage on Lot 6 be relocated to a different place on its lot, Reasoal :Final low enough spngineering required ge a revision because the prior plan did not porch and garage. — ---_-- •---3. Request:That the Phasing Plan be revised to allow for the homes nearest to — R btfilt out at e—beginnuig of the — - request of adjacent neighbors. °] °° to the Reason:Neighbors on Rugged Road requested that we prioritize the home construction on the Rugged Road end of the site so that their disruption would be consolidated over a shorter time period.This dies not change the impact on other abutters who would have the same duration of adjacent construction pushed somewhat later in the overall project time frame. Page 1 Enclosed are a number of items that support our requests: 1. Letter of August 3,2006 from Arthur Reade,Esq.to Linda Williams,delivered a week in advance of the August 11 meeting,with the original request. 2. Two site plans showing the Lot 8/9 house swap and garage relocation: a. One plan(Hand-marked Plan 1)shows the entire site showing the proposed house swap for Lots 8 and 9.The house currently approved for Lot 8 would go to Lot 9 and the house currently approved for Lot 9 would go to Lot 8. Lot 8 is currently a 4 bedroom lot and it would become a 3 bedroom lot.Lot 9 is currently a 4 bedroom lot and would become a 4 bedroom lot. No relief from setbacks or any other dimensional matters is requested,however in the spirit of cooperation and a good working relationship,we are requesting approval. b. One plan(Hand-marked Plan 2)shows a closer view of the area with the changes. 3. Two Phasing Plans a. Current Phasing Plan approved with final project approval in February b. Proposed Revised Plan 4. Email from Lisa Dias,largest abutter and primary appellant supporting revised phasing plan and house swap. 5. Letter of Peter Freeman,Esq.providing some perspective on the procedures built into the 40B law for making insubstantial changes.Mr.Freeman is one of the most experienced lawyers in Massachusetts in the 40B area and has provided specialized services for our project included handling appeals. 1-41 6. Arthur Reade has separately requested(through the normal procedure)that three lots be released:Lot 19(previously requested but postponed at the last meeting), and Lots 22 and 9. The formal request is not included in this package.These requests will bring the total lots released to 6 out of 40.You have previously approved 3 lot releases.We expect to request up to 9 additional lot releases between now and the spring. 7. Andrew Vorce has agreed to come to the ZBA meeting to discuss the role of his department in overseeing the project,especially with respect to infrastructure installation. We hope to receive a letter from his department recommending approval of the lot releases requested in advance of the meeting.Infrastructure has been under construction for 8 weeks and is expected to have major portions completed by February 2007. I hope that this package provides the information you have requested and supports our requests for these minor changes.As you know,this project has gone through a Page 2 number of stages including controversy,disagreement,negotiation,court action, creative compromise and finally,settlement and cooperation. Since our reconciliation last November,all parties have been working successfully and in a spirit of cooperation,something that we very much wish to continue. Given the size and complexity of this project,and given the very detailed nature of the permit that has been issued,it is not realistic to expect that we can build out the project without some minor adjustments. Establishing a process that can do this,that complies with the 40B procedures,and that is open and accountable is therefore very important. I look forward to discussing this with you at the September 8 meeting. Sincerely, Joshua Posner Cc:Board of Appeals members Linda Williams,Administrator,Board of Appeals ,Andrew Vorce,Director,Planning Board Page 3 READE, GUT.T.ICBSEN, HANLEY & GIFFORD, LLP SIX YOUNG'S WAY • ARTHUR L READS,JR.,P.C. NANTUCKET,MASSACHUSETTS 02554 KENNETH A.GULUCKSEN MAILING ADDRESS: MARIANNE H4NLEY (508)228-3128 WHITNEY A.FORD FAX: (508)228-5630 POST OFFICE BOX 2669 NANTUCKET,MASS. 02384 STEVEN L COHEN August 3, 2006 BY HAND DELIVERY Linda F. Williams, Zoning Administrator Town of Nantucket 2 Fairgrounds Road Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 • Re: Rugged Scott 40B project ZBA File No. 051-03 Dear Linda: • Would you kindly place the above matter upon the agenda for the Board of Appeals meeting on August 11, 2006, for the following purposes: 1. To execute a decision waiving the sewer connection fee for the affordable lots only, as previously voted by the Board. 2. To issue Form J releases (enclosed) for Lots 13, 14 and 19 from the Covenant. As per the decision, inspections as to the status of the subdivision infrastructure are to be made by the Planning staff. Please note that Lot 14 will be one of the ten affordable units. 3. To review a revised site plan showing reversal of the house designs for Lots 8 and 9, and relocation of the garage for Lot 6. The Board of Appeals has the power to determine whether a change in a 40B project constitutes an insubstantial change, and if it so finds the Board has the power to modify the decision without public notice or hearing. 4. Modification of the phasing plan for the project, pursuant to a proposal to be submitted. I enclose copies of the documents which have been recorded to date, as you requested. READE, GULLICKSEN,HANLEY& GIFFORD,LLP Linda F. Williams August 2, 2006 Page Two This request for modification is being filed pursuant to 760 CMR 31.01 (3) (a) , and the applicant respectfully requests that it be treated as an insubstantial change pursuant to 760 CMR 31.03(3) (b) . By making this request for modification, the Applicant does not waive any of its rights under the existing Comprehensive Permit, as modified, any and all of which are expressly reserved. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, Arthur I. Reade, Jr. air@readelaw.com AIR/iry cc: Josh Posner (by e-mail) r:\Rparp\PosnarlZ81lo6LSP.doc til F- ,, ; Z C C • AIiliij X Q < �a 0 ; iiii 1$1in : 6 = m 0 inY OA w C6 r4 ILLC7 < d O N S. H u .1.1Pi....N.—MNNNN—... 0 NN- NN- O 0 W m _ f • 6. 0 ..-NMYvl,p n0ONO--NM • • FEE EFFSEF�FFEa Q Q Q • •Z be V �< 00 O oU • • ) •••Oa399f1 � — I 4 a i --------\. ,.. 4. tio ' A 1...,- i tIL,a �_ Rao r _ arm � . ti'jj I! c.caQd. _ , . ...--_____1,0 sti..--e . o tii,1/4,1-1 :*,_ 1,.; .i f i tilitaN ! / ,:. 4p. � � li - IP . Ili iiill -II it till!'" "- ioll—r. 1' (;-' /1/1111*/ /1111%'--ii ,.wioriii,k 1 t 4, -->>it/ i e 1 tti ,,.,, i I , i� vioatir kat— �, ato ,siiii� \7011.0A. . ,,..4.,, ...____ 4.4.1„,, „„:00._u ..,. 1z 0! j � --:::-:-..,,. igt_ 1 1--- R•ti_., I 1 r, idieffit4ii i.::. .10,..11..e..... ,..:.. 1.0.4411 . • Ad, 'Plt„%fti,411111.44.7/01114 ,eh 1 I i 1 w1M.rlltlr tt01w - O170 flLiifaWi '7901110 Y771ri mom,a wrw�l tuvwr9l' 1e.q+a wrl > aT lis i Si aro. —�____i3Jf� r W. .naro�sAwtia+a4rioq w' a SlL51/006 bY11 131p(ILIMN ammo' 9Maw AYII 511006 OMIT OWtl 03AII IV 39 1f1 rend 10V31 VOA INE idDB 315 6 V 9 .9 5101 NW ONy1 AO Mild ' 6 6 4 1 Io i i i �^ ... .:j3 .11✓! l�s6a r i Iil1 11! Id:!I > � /; t ---, ow .i i i..- !tt� � _/..,,,:t Ir pj1 .1 A KS artits ,_ / --_____________ / i W • t J IA It c i+ W *.t:t 1 4 �k I 1 11 I ft . 1 At a. 1 it= } of 7-- 6 : 1 ll 1tii---*- i:,:, o \ \ t- 1 /,* ft rae,xt) . • 0 k i i il 41.7 / `. —' •, EV 4..4 n / ,,, 1 „ ...;;,_, lit-, iiiiJ ` \ ”' �Y1�� \ '\ Y \ •v, if 0. tl \ill I I 0 (NI �; 0 A , •' sz , .x. a o ,,,,,. Q,.. us , _, it„L. .•,!..... .74."------ . .. a ii 3 . _. f 25 AVON STREET.POST OFFICE BOX 463 KEENE,NEW HAMPSHIRE 03431-0463 BA YBUTT °r NANTUCKET.'508-325-4962 FAX 508-325-4963 TELEPHONE 603-352-6846 CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS FAX 603-352-6633 BID FAX 603-352-6663 www.baybutt.com email:info@baybutt.com C vrr " cy L4-- January 26,2006 Construction Phasing Plan for Rugged Scott LLC Ref.: Town Of Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals File#051-03 Sections 4.1.1,4.5 Description of phases: • Phase One consists of the construction of 8 housing units. The units consist of types M-1, M-2, M-3, M-5, M-6, M-8,A-1 R,A-4, G and G-R. The location of Phase One is the Northeast corner of the property along the main entrance road adjacent to Rugged Road. Phase Two consists of the construction 12 housing units,tennis court, pool and the Community Building Unit The units consist of types M-1, M-2, M-3, M-4, M-9, M-11, M-13, A-1,A-2, G and G-R. The location of the tennis court is the far Northeast comer of the property.The pool and Community Building is located toward the center of the property. The housing units are boated in the Northwest corner of the property along the Southern entrance road adjacent to Scott's Way. Phase Three consists of the construction of 10 housing units. The units consist of types M- 1, M-7, M-8, M-10, M-11,A-2,A-6, G and G-R. The location of Phase Three is the Southeast corner of the property along the main entrance road adjacent to Rugged Road. Phase Four consists of the construction of 10 Housing Units. The units consist of types M- 2, M-3, M-5, M-7, M-9, M-12,A-3,A-4,A-5, G-R and G2-R The location of Phase Four is the Southwest corner of the property along the Southern entrance road adjacent to Scott's Way. hi I 'l i . a 4 d I . i 1I a ria EC i gj i ••• some Wirral + . • 11 •••r1 Alf* • +. ... .._______ ,...-.....-----...- -....-..-.-.... J I •••,\''' ______---4—.--- } o -- ft, •i�fii y- hC 1•Eck1 ■nuliu11l `�p�-_tl\ warr.rlrU•M=r••11••t $ ■■uraliiull. \ ••�A•L•r;J1 �••UP•t 410 �� - ••I�..`�,.' t awl uuun• fit,<: lam �� I.■RAa■ui• `t �, -11•11'lb, �:,.-.0•441 .•4u .� ; -f-I••' o • i Nk �:1Lam \ �' Ict1.i r- .•••••t. k7!_-�\\ . l 010.11• '\: 1: :1,\ ' \1� uuun lit •J•n•••t ��, ',��•4:s a..--•u■ - �f t•1.11• 111 L.- I..- \�•!.1� • n.•r1 RAIZ e- es* 1.3".0•••1 l 111111•1R.. oils sr 1,',10•'4.1 i3"'•'441'!44• .Il_INV.,•■;..r' 'r---i■�., ...._,,,.,,,,,..„„;,„:4 • ,Trie,-„-,„ •.. _-'-iC i :7} .........„ . ■11■■•:r•r 1:•1l�l rl1, la,.11:.11 ••4. - r_1.1../..47■it ■• l7 ■ar ��- ■ i� `.-1` .' J.:::• Il,.r.al■u_=_•111••_1_ 9_r�'7 thi ■1.111.:-11•._ l:•rlwa.".4■I rt Y I ■u .-1.■■,n r11.mn• 1111._ fir+♦+ �'R•i• 411711' ..11,1111.4/:,-•. f■ 4r/._... 1\ + • sums•-.-,l■•!y3".' Zn....-- +^ 4. +• ♦`y 1111■a•.�4'•■1111 a_^•.1//1..'-: M 4,444 ti X y all •11■11■•••lll11•r::•.. 4.411/P, /111/M1 /rr•I• y 1 rll�i + • — ■1111■■hilt.1111..'1•.1. '•11 ` + :To,'a..� • trjTj ■11••,I'..k/ '•-•.I. ,,• .r +.-=J.._ + 444,4, fy •t1 uun,'�a•wIi innnu•1 ''*, c....;) ■ -1..11112./'.S 4,1•,,_ + +1 y 1111!•••.0 •••mm.,•,••,.11!•liar 111 A.+` l I. ■11 7r.Ja•CN.••�-1.7•.•■I'.'it Kat '�',y y+♦ •4•4t+ O 1111••■,, . SA 4 4 1111••IIII _ i.. 1.1.___. • - mr■mr.u••u we•r nu11u.G■G +•y • + + ■0117 . 11••111 11'111__. - . _ ♦ + + • + �� • �� J aa� ,;��..: 25 AVON STREET. POST OFFICE BOX 463 -= y KEENE,NEW HAMPSHIRE 03431-0463 D.4 YBUTT 4irTELEPHONE 603-352-6846 FAX 603-352-6633 BID FAX 603-352-6663 X CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS www.baybuttcom email:info(cDbaybutt com NANTUCKET:508-325-4962 FAX 508-325-4963 August 4,2006 _ s�4 Revised Construction Phasing Plan for Rugged Scott LLC Ref.: Town Of Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals File#051-03 Sections 4.1.1,4.5 Note:Based on a request from neighbors,we are revising the phased build out of the project in order to prioritize completion of the Rugged Road portion of the site. Description of phases: Phase One consists of the construction of 18 housing units, Community Building and pool. The units consist of types M-1, M-2, M-3, M-5, M-6, M-7, M-8, M-10, M-11, A-2,A-4,A-5, and A-6. The location of Phase One is the North end of the property along the South side of the main entrance road, now called Wood Lily Road, adjacent to Rugged Road. The Community Building and Pool are located towards the center of the development. Phase Two consists of the construction of 10 housing units. The units consist of types M-2, M-3, M-5, M-7, M-9, M-12,A-3,A-4 and A-5. The location of Phase Two is the Southwest corner of the property along the Southern entrance road adjacent to Scott's Way. Phase'Three consists of the construction of 11 Housing Units. The units consist of types M- 1, M-2, M-3, M-4, M-9, M-11, M-13,A-1 and A-2. The location of Phase Three is the Northwest corner of the property along the Southern entrance road adjacent to Scott's Way. hi Z Ii M iI ; 0 F � 1 ? _ _ ; Q a a. a. a. d - 0 i I 1 fi. !I 1g 7* iiia « ____L_______:____,,,,,: i ____ _ . .. .. .. 1 •- • ............\, \ ___./ +: \ s.:�\ti��\`��\, a;�t\��\\\``S ;•-tet. • \ Ls_ / -1\4,�`._ 4s: ��L `tea:: `�,�\\ \IN '1 ` 1;`\‘ \S.:„,.. ` ,~` \.. \.-4'',i‘.'...` ,' Tit:-i i 1 •t• 4:444 4' ,14• 4• $114 • ��•:+ •\ sn�c.•?t silo._. _.....18.4 -1 . .4.• _i�� +t`\ :twat 41•��'••t)• i .±++IN I r±+. y+ .�•••, j.M4r� 1,��tVGiu t�,�.� :*,4+ J l r.v...fff:• Ott-�• �u•: +•♦•♦ +♦..• �� /wit' ,...- •iw• .w-•••tft•: itt)tits-• 1)VAIN'•V le, +++.4,* +++ Al -",, ' + lit t...40 root,• iipoit-4.••••ao <2) xvasuctis \ t' i g,.., Z I 1— w ut W W W .ill z S4 ` i a c2 10 a. a. a. 0 x N Pt cl ki Peel 1/1001 viii +.++ -L-------------"-- --- : :----- -.-- -—-- -.j i . . \\Lit 3 \ Nm ,;%-; k\s....,,,N.N7a1N2s.k+s,,,N.1/4s1t7-1 ,'':'\*NN _i....‘k \ 1,,,.-,4,,,v,„.0,,, . di8 till \ ,-N. \--.'?' - NA.„ . .;. V \` \ ai• .�. d \+ ♦\ \\\ �. eras •%f \ \ •"::'.11.11Y l&'tINsI.r i. rt.p:N.7 ■ +-. .. , + wi•1•l!•O• • 4. II0,1'MI:•-' ,ice'••+/• r . ♦ + S r�CN�•u4ra••i741144 llq•• 841 i •• 1 +s •.-40r•f i1• •s ��..... .... ,..:...4 +lka, � s �. + + ► NOL�141+ :e••••••• t 1 1-10111a•:•..e••••e•• . • if ...a 141 t I I t•lull-1W:1 0 IPS it•••1)111• `+i+.+++ +.r4:17.,,"-. ! liry a:Wrgo°03141 !I 1•t+T .t+••P•/• C;2 + r + + 1 r ♦ 4 + 4 r W.WW•••••••••••• Page 1 of 1 /+l-aU Ad#- Duo From: Lisa Dias[Ipdias@nantucket.net] Sent: Wednesday,August 23,2006 729 AM To: 'Josh Posner' Subject: Phasing Plan Good Morning,Josh, We received a copy of the revised Phasing Plan. Thank you for listening to our concerns regarding the initial plan. We support the Revised Phasing Plan. Additionally,we have no issues with swapping the houses on Lot 8&9. Lisa No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version:7.1.4051 Virus Database:268.11.5/425-Release Date:8/222006 8/31/2006 Freeman Law Group Attorneys at Law 1597 Falmouth Road—Suite 3 10 Concord Avenue Peter L.Freeman Centerville,MA 02632 Cambridge,MA 02138 Joshua Davis Janet R.Stearn, (508)775-5010 (617)876-6128 Meredith K.Went (508)775-9105(fax) (617)576-6612(fax) Albert E.Todiao e-mail:pfrcemaaQRtamanlawarouacom TO: Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals FROM: Peter L.Freeman DATE: August 27,2006 RE: Rugged Scott,LLC Comprehensive Permit This memorandum is intended to supplement my client,Rugged Scott,LLC's request to the Board for approval of certain changes as minor modifications pursuant to 760 CMR.31.03(30(b),as set forth in the letter to you from Arthur I.Reade,Jr.,Esq., dated August 3,2006. The two proposed changes are; 1.)reversal of the house designs for Lots 8 and 9,and relocation of the garage for Lot 6;and 2.)modification of the phasing plan for the project. In my experience with many comprehensive permit projects over the last 20 years (almost 100,at this point),these changes are precisely the kind of changes that are typically treated as minor or insubstantial modifications that can be granted without the need for a public hearing. As to the houses,we are not proposing a change in the type of housing or size of houses—we will still have the variety of specific styles of single family houses that have been approved,only the designation of which lot will have which style(switching the ones for Lot 8 and 9)is being changed. The changes will essentially be non-recognizable from the neighborhood streets,and internally,the same pleasing mix that you have already approved will be approved.Likewise,we are not proposing to change any of the minimum yard setbacks that are required by the permit. The regulations at 760 CMR 31.03 (2)give examples of the types of changes that are ordinarily treated as substantial,and changes that are ordinarily treated.as insubstantial. Increasing the number of units,or the height,by more than 10%,or changes in building types(not styles),i.e.,changing from garden apartments to townhouses,or changing from for-sale to rental,are typically treated as substantial changes. We do not fall in this category. The examples of insubstantial changes include a reduction in the number of housing units,a decrease in the floor area of units by less than 10%,a change in the number of bedrooms(if the total number for the project does not change by more than 10%),or a changes in the color or style or materials used. We respectfully submit that we are within this category,especially since the styles we are proposing are not really changing,rather,the locations of which lot will have which style are changing. 1 We also believe that this argument applies to the change in the phasing plan. The overall project will still be precisely as permitted,only the sequence of construction will slightly change. We also believe that the phasing changes will not create any negative impacts but will in fact improve things in that they respond to a specific request from neighbors for this change. In particular,neighbor Lisa Dias has written in support of the proposed changes to the phasing plan. As to neighbors,although based on the regulations and precedent from comprehensive permits in many other towns we do not believe that notice to abutters and a public hearing are required,we want you to know that we are informing the neighbors who were party to the appeal of your initial Decision of our proposed changes,and will invite them to attend the meeting on September 8,2006. We believe that the state regulations contemplate this simpler process for minor changes because it is recognized that such changes frequently occur,and to require that the formal notice and public hearing and appeal process be utilized every time would be contrary to the intent and spirit of the comprehensive permit statute,i.e.,expediting the creation of affordable housing. The assessment of whether such changes are substantial or insubstantial certainly involves an assessment of whether there is any real chance that the proposed changes could be detrimental to the public,and we believe there is no such chance in this instance. From Mr.Reade I should point out that this is the same basic process used by the Nantucket Planning Board in determining whether a modification is insubstantial or not with respect to a project under their jurisdiction. In terms of expediting the process,and to place less of a burden on your time,we would also propose that,in addition to your approving these changes as insubstantial,you approve a set of standards that would allow for future changes to house styles or locations to be approved administratively without the need for a hearing or meeting. We are thinking that as long as the required minimum yard setbacks are maintained,as long as we still have all of the different styles of houses represented on the site in the same numbers as presently approved(perhaps with leeway of no more than 10% for any one style),and as long as we do not have the same ue to down style than once on adjoining lots,a of house repeated more aPProVed bychange or changes meeting the foo regoing could be staff administratively. The causation for all of this,of course,is that DIM that the realities of marketing are taking place,a buyer who likes a certain lot happens to like a style different that what is presently shown for that lot,and it is of course impossible to have predicted such preferences in advance. Again,we do not believe that any substantive aspects of the permit are being changed. I hope that this is helpful to you as you consider our requests,and I look forward to seeing you on September 8,2006. cc: Kimberly Saillant,Esq. Arthur L Reade,Jr.,Esq. Josh Posner 2 NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS AGENDA MEETING DATE: 1:00 PM,SEPTEMBER 8,2006 CONFERENCE ROOM,TOWN ANNEX BUILDING,2 FAIRGROUNDS ROAD,NANTUCKET,MA 02554(ELECTRIC CO.BLDG.) APPROVAL OF MINUTES: OLD BUSINESS: LOCATION REP. ACTION 051-03 RUGGED SCOTT 40B MODIFICATION REQUEST C *CONTINUED FROM AUG.2006 MEETING; SITTING:NS,DW,MO,KK,DWIL 057-06 CARLSON 12 WESTERN AVENUE JENSEN C *CONTINUED WITHOUT OPENING FROM JULY/AUG.2006;APPLICATION WAS AMENDED AND RENOTICEDN FOR THIS MEETING 067-06 BRYANS 105 SURFSIDE ROAD READE C *TO BE CONTINUED TO OCT. 13,2006 MEETING WITHOUT OPENING AFTER BEING CONTINUED FROM AUG.2006 MEETING. 069-06 NIR RETAIL LLC 2 STRAIGHT WHARF PHILBRICK C *CONTINUED FROM AUG.2006 MEETING AFTER OPENING; SITTING: NS,DW,KK,DWIL,BT NEW BUSINESS: 072-06 FARRELL 77 EEL POINT ROAD PHILBRICK 073-06 RISEBOROUGH 3 WEST YORK LANE HUNTER CAMPBELL 074-06 RISEBOROUGH 7 WEST YORK LANE HUNTER CAMPBELL 075-06 CAMBPELL 5 WEST YORK LANE HUNTER 076-06 MCGOVERN 32 WALSH STREET ALGER 077-06 OVESON 22 WIGWAM ROAD ALGER 078-06 NT.CAMPFIRE 64 MONOMOY ROAD GLIDDEN 079-06 CHTFIELD-TYLOR 91WASHINTON STREET EXT. GLIDDEN 080-06 KANE FAMILY 14 WARREN STREET SELF OTHER BUSINESS: DUNN/WAINE/ZBA(094-98/060-99),4 BROAD STREET,LAST CONTINUED WITHOUT OPENING FROM FEBRUARY 14,2006, MEMBERS: NANCY SEVRENS(NS);-CHAIR; DALE WAINE(DW)-VP;EDWARD TOOLE(ET)- CLERK; MICHAEL O'MARA(MO);KERIM KOSEATAC(KK). ALTERNATES:DAVID WILEY(DWIL);BURR TUPPER(FI) NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS AGENDA MEETING DATE: 1:00 PM,AUGUST 11,2006,CONFERENCE ROOM,2 FAIRGROUNDS ROAD, NANTUCKET,MA 02554(ELECTRIC CO.BLDG) APPROVAL OF MINUTES: OLD BUSINESS: LOCATION REP. ACTION RUGGED SCOTT 40B MODIFICATION REQUEST 057-06 CARLSON 12 WESTERN AVENUE JENSEN C *TO BE CONTINUED WITHOUT OPENING TO SEPT.8,2006 AFTER BEING CONTINUED FROM JULY MEETING WITHOUT OPENING/MATTER WILL BE RENOTICED NEW BUSINESS: 063-06 BENNETT 8 PINE GROVE SELF 064-06 NHM REALTY LLC 77 EASTON STREET ALGER (POINT BREEZE) 065-06 PRESTANDREA 30 PILGRIM ROAD HUNTER 066-06 MACDOUGALL 9 BAYBERRY LANE,SCONSET READE 067-06 BRYANS 105 SURFSIDE ROAD READE *TO BE CONTINUED TO SEPT.8,2006 WITHOUT OPENING 068-06 KNAUFT 18 EAT FIRE SPRING ROAD WEINMAN 069-06 NIR RETAIL LLC 2 STRAIGHT WHARF PHILBRICK 070-06 MADDEN/PEARL 21 WAUWINET ROAD PHILBRICK 071-06 17A WSHINGTON 17A WASHINGTON STREET GLIDDEN STREET LLC OTHER BUSINESS: MEMBERS: NANCY SEVRENS(NS);-CHAIR;DALE WAINE(DW)-VP; C. EDWARD TOOLE (ET)-CLERK; MICHAEL O'MARA(MO); KERIM KOSEATAC(KK). ALTERNATES: DAVID WILEY(DWIL); BURR TUPPER(BT). 1 Vision Government Solutions Page 1 of 3 9 WOOD LILY RD Location 9 WOOD LILY RD Mblu 67//807// Acct# 0067-807 Owner LENANE BRIAN&SUSAN Assessment $1,738,400 PID 185879 Building Count 1 Current Value Assessment Valuation Year Improvements Land I Total 2020 $1,353,200, $385,200 $1,738,400 Owner of Record Owner LENANE BRIAN&SUSAN Sale Price $1,095,000 Co-Owner Certificate Address 9 WOOD LILY RD Book&Page 01495/0131 NANTUCKET,MA 02554 Sale Date 08/06/2015 Instrument 00 Ownership History Ownership History Owner Sale Price Certificate Book&Page Instrument Sale Date LENANE BRIAN&SUSAN $1,095,000 I 01495/0131 00 08/06/2015 RUGGED SCOTT LLC $1,650,0001 00761/0053 00 06/14/2002 JEMISON STEVEN C $0 I 00191/0287 99 05/01/1982 Building Information Building 1 :Section 1 Year Built: 2014 Building Photo Living Area: 2,915 Replacement Cost: $1,365,407 Building Percent Good: 99 Replacement Cost Less Depreciation: $1,351,800 Building Attributes Field Description Style Colonial Model I Residential http://gis.vgsi.com/nantucketma/Parcel.aspx?Pid=185879 1/24/2021 Vision Government Solutions Page 2 of 3 Grade: Excellent i j Building Photn Stories: 2 Occupancy 1 Exterior Wall 1 Wood Shingle Exterior Wall 2 Roof Structure: Gable/Hlp Roof Cover Wood Shingle Interior Wall 1 Drywall/Sheet Interior Wall 2 Interior Fir 1 Hardwood htt /lin es.v si.com/ hotos/NantucketMAPhotos/n00\03\83\91 ( P a9 g P 1P5) Interior Fir 2 Building Layout Heat Fuel Gas Heat Type: Forced Air-Duc AC Type: Central 7 E " i Total Bedrooms: 3 . I i Total Bthrms: 3 Total Half Baths: 1 .,t Total Xtra Fixtrs: I .',- Total Rooms: I2 Bath Style: Average Kitchen Style: Modem Num Kitchens j (http:/lmages.vgsi coin'photos/NantucketMAPhotos'/Sketches/165679_1.1 Cndtn I Building Sub-Areas(sq ft) Legend Usrfld 103 I i Gross Living Usrfld 104 1Code Description Area Area Usrfld 105 1 BAS First Floor 1,332 1 332 Usrfld 106 FBM Basement,Finished 1.220 854 Usrfld 107 I FUS Upper Story,Finished 729� 729 Num Park i FOP Porch,Open,Finished 277 i 0 Fireplaces STP I Stoop 16 0 Usrfld 108 UBM I Basement,Unfinished I 112: 0, Usrfld 101 WDK IDeck,Wood 156 0 Usrfld 102 i 3,8421 2,915 Usrfld 100 Usrfld 300 Usrfld 301 Extra.Features Extra Features Legend No Data for Extra Features http://gis.vgsi.com/nantucketma/Parcel.aspx?Pid=185879 1/24/2021 Vision Government Solutions Page 3 of 3 Land Land Use Land Line Valuation Use Code 1010 Size(Acres) 0.13 Description Single Fam MO1 Frontage Zone LUG2 Depth Neighborhood 450 Assessed Value $385,200 Alt Land Appr No Category Outbuildings Outbuildings Le end 1 Code Description 1 Sub Code ( Sub Description Size J Value I Bldg# I PAT2 PATIO-GOOD ! 1 192.00 S.F.1 $1,400 I 1 Valuation History Assessment Valuation Year Improvements Land Total 2020 $1,353,200 $385,200 $1,738,400 2018 $861,500 $384,300 $1,245,8001 2017 $837,8001 $352,300 $1,190,1001 2016 $968,200 $307,4001 $1,275,6001 I 2015 $01 $331,500 $331,500' (c)2021 Vision Government Solutions,Inc.All rights reserved. http://gis.vgsi.com/nantucketma/Parcel.aspx?Pid=185879 1/24/2021 Vision Government Solutions Page 1 of 3 6 FOX GRAPE LN Location 6 FOX GRAPE LN Mblu 67/1808// Acct# 0067-808 Owner GESNER DAVID S&JULIE A Assessment $1,829,700 PID 185878 Building Count 1 Current Value Assessment Valuation Year I Improvements Land Total 2020 $1,441,5001 $388 200 $182570 1 i Owner of Record Owner GESNER DAVID S&JULIE A Sale Price $1,815,000 Co-Owner Certificate Address 20 STURBRIDGE RD Book&Page 01611/0116 WELLESLEY,MA 02481 Sale Date 09/29/2017 Instrument 00 Ownership History Ownership History Owner Sale Price Certificate Book&Page Instrument Sale Date GESNER DAVID S&JULIE A $1,815,000 01611/0116 00 09/29/2017 PRESCHLACK DAVID C $1,315,000 01126/0037 00 02/192068 RUGGED SCOTT LLC $1,650,000 00761/0053 00 06/142002 JEMISON STEVEN C $0 l 00191/0287 99 05/61/1922 Building Information Building 1 :Section 1 Year Built: 2006 Building Photo Living Area: 3,326 Replacement Cost: $1,493,003 Building Percent Good: 96 Replacement Cost Less Depreciation: $1,433,300 Building Attributes Field Description Style Colonial http://gis.vgsi.com/nantucketmalParcel.aspx?Pid=185878 1/24/2021 Vision Government Solutions Page 2 of 3 Model Residential E Building Photo Grade: 1 Excellent Stories: 2 Occupancy 1 Exterior Wall 1 Wood Shingle Exterior Wall 2 Roof Structure: Gable/Hip Roof Cover Wood Shingle Interior Wall 1 I Drywall/Sheet Interior Wall 2 (http://images.vgsi.com/photos/NantucketMAPhotos/A0o\03\79\32.jpg) Interior Fir 1 Hardwood Building Layout Interior Fir 2 Heat Fuel Gas Heat Type: Forced Air-Duc 1- • AC Type: Central 31_ Total Bedrooms: 6 Total Bthrms: 14t 1 `. Total Half Baths: 1 r Total Xtra Fixtrs: I . Total Rooms: Bath Style: Average Kitchen Style: Modem (http:Nimages.vgsi.corn/photos/NantucketMAPhotos//S ketches/185878_11 i Num Kitchens Building Sub-Areas(sq ft) Legend Cndtn Code Description Gross Living Usrfld 103 Area Area Usrfld 104 BAS First Floor ( 1,342 I 1,342 I Usrfld 105 FUS Upper Story,Finished 1,0451 1,045 Usrfld 106 FBM Basement,Finished 1,342 939 Usrfld 107 FOP I Porch,Open,Finished 315 0 Num Park STP Stoop 721 D i Fireplaces 4,1161 3,3261 Usrfld 108 i Usrfld 101 Usrfld 102 Usrfld 100 Usrfld 300 Usrfld 301 Extra Features Extra Features Legend No Data for Extra Features httn://gis.vgsi.com/nantucketma/Parcel.asnx?Pid=185878 1/24/2021 Vision Government Solutions Page 3 of 3 Land Land Use Land Line Valuation Use Code 1010 Size(Acres) 0.18 Description Single Fam MO1 Frontage Zone LUG2 Depth Neighborhood 450 Assessed Value $386,200 Alt Land Appr No Category Outbuildings Outbuildings Legend Code Description Sub Code Sub Description I Size 1 ValueJJJ Bldg# FGR1 GARAGE-AVE 1 322.D0 S.F. $7.700 PATI PATIO-AVG I 120 DO S.F. $500 i Valuation History Assessment Valuation Year Improvements Land Total 2020 $1,441,500 $388,200! $1.829 700 2018 $989,100 I $356,100 $1 375 200 2017 $652,500 $353,900, $1 006 400 2016 $614,200 $3D8,900, $923 100 2015 $578,200 $333,300 $911 500 (c)2021 Vision Government Solutions Inc.All rights reserved. http://gis.vgsi.com/nantucketma/Parcel.aspx?Pid=185878 1/24/2021 ` Certificate No: OP-2007-0460 Building Permit No.: BP-2006-0943 Commonwealth of Massachusetts Town of Nantucket Building Electrical Mechanical Permits This is to Certify that the SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING located at Dwelling Type 6 FOX GRAPE LANE in the TOWN OF NANTUCKET Address Town/City Name IS HEREBY GRANTED A PERMANENT CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY Modular dwelling full cellar 1306sf, 1st fl 1306sf 2nd fl 1013sf 4 bedrooms 4 baths CO for permit 1293-06 M/P 67-808 This permit is granted in conformity with the Statutes and ordinances relating thereto,and expires unless sooner suspended or revoked. Expiration Date Issued On: Fri Sep 7,2007 /7e-iD GeoTMS®2007 Des Lauriers Municipal Solutions,Inc. VI PTI rn ` -6 -p � V` 5. 13 _ D o p � p 33 U) -4 m M Zn C z0 oor_n, DZ0 --iCI � ` O c m n � 0 7" k C c� = iz Wz _ = ro xi 91 rj ox m Cmzm k FNo ir —i p )> m ® D, 0) m ` 0 r z > � --1 ZzO Dmml ;�. CD) COm o � O ® -nom k ` •A` tii Xi E Ti ° m c0 � � c� z -i �,, `. O rm tom ommt ,, z -< - D33 mm o m M = Zc m tem z0 � � C � 0 _ cn z c -0 3 N Q. `, � � m , �pO - r O V V z i m mi m � oo � c) v c c\ w m W O * ,7Oom ® � � 0 k, mmil 0 C z _ o m Z z �' = D Dr- nz 0 ° U) 7 r m --i )St b C.oZ UJ CO ` Q O = O J = Q °C tifQ = Z Q w o _ F- O z wi_ \ Z 76 7 uJ GFW 000 FW- = � 0 v N z - o 0N � a ° IJ W 0 IMMIN ` Q J W U- >. W �- �p z a � 0 -I fa. u- 0 GQ. fa 2 0 Z �' Q �- 0 C 0 Z = V = m wQ — 0 'N MI al bo NNoW 2a � ~ F- N. wwa0 wm w = Z U- cLa os cv NHzO w0 WO W ll o — m U W \ y Elhe Ilmm Z2 Ha F- D Q o FW- NQ ° u- a oP a u . w Z w 5 0 W W Z v� V4 = OZm z = = 0 (� F- N = F- I- W _ ►� v � 0w � wm oz g e 'A! 2ME- u) CC cc 0 NZ o °' a `� z ~ wW a LLau i :8 j Z z = M � °- m = 0 Z o 1` 0 O ~ ice 00 F- = O = Z 4 0000i wQ ZOa U a CI a) , w J ~ i ° 00 M0 Q z � `gil U = Z Dcc ( cow c , Z Z o O 4-1 cn 0 co Q Q W 0 0 - Ns J I_ F- wm mN =IxIll v u h 2zzLii w0 = H ZZ W m Q � � act = Z � m Wz0 a O CI Q = .. }- < Z > 2w p wp co _ !" - w0w� aQ 020 0 I-- mij mmil m� ZOO :z0U U ( mV0 =QWm o ;z MIMI l cn I- p 4 WOQQ U. cot) Qz0° a ZD w O44 U = WZ 0W = mz LL moM = u.. m m E W )›: Hh 1... z � ZwWZ QZ F- = 0 C O <rr0; = V C1 p W < Q o h-zi = cn = �- ZO ww = �. _ Ili 000 W to WZQE' F = FF, U G �0U)� °- E - a Z w oc 5 fl—E- a u) v Z2(n0 T. 0.W W r • to cc O = WN = J = Z 0W = WQ F- w cr, z E- a F- w 0 �¢ CC I- a w v i w v n` % Ct kora Q • . :n I 44 �► \skiN N.........., `I 1 cc No il V Nt kil 41.* C 1 ```' Z .1.0.• -I 101' kkIli .fik Ili a , z >- I U ,k Ow w ` H O U I+O ‘ _ -� O U = i °6 Z 0 I J J k CD < 1- < hi le , O Z_ Q Q Q Ct --I O 1-1-1 < Q f �. c H co cc cc I I a Z O O cc _ U LL \ o I tC1 10 3 cc o N a a ► r J4 w 'y 1 1 t e b ik is 3 , JZZ z Lu = � Z iii Q�2 I- ZD m 0ZQZ a ~ J ZQ0C Q > Q D E cn U W Z < W O- J O J < 0O05 W2 D 0- M a § 0 LL N m 0 -! Ta rtt o minin- in- < . 22 I- w m 2 d 0 o o a 0 W 1 U O 2 m U 3 < C - O a --L 2 ID s Z N 2 w j t i/ Z Q m m z .o.> S m E Q n § ,.,• -2, g1, .,„.° , i szP t . (, v `� e g8 z m F. w m o p W • -16088d , - e o2. m ' m D C7 v o' zzO ¢ ' 21MZ e a - r A z + « r J a N w . < u a s ei D r4 Zoa < mm ; _ CO N e2 cli OQ <cQ a . ceo - " U_ ad , LL Z < W o o LL m r= r LL 4 m ` c .2 E e s_ ` CO E N w y _ u a g g 01 a Z o .r J w E .t ..§ .- o — 0 m w w m ›- ...I J d o E a o wo $ 8 % 7 a _ a wCw n o fo a w o OQ $ no a p < FE , w uwx _o ¢ LL n- ua y O ` Zm Gr w 0 o n " r $ o O p O C _ Cz yU Jaw3 _ a ` p n A in ¢ ' aUo' = E I.ran. ' •13 ‘.-.. e zz Q an in 0 r IF ±•❑ z i Q U1 Q i 2 O 0 w - Z N W _ � ~ " ww a _ / Yrs K o a" a ' ' ! 00 0 LL U L z Li o - 2 O < < y m 4--- F w .^1 ¢ 1L_ i w UCD w y Q_- o w _3= x o • 0 0 0 7 Z C.1O �' a - € n U u W 2 Z a o o E c o 2 m Q - N > N m m 1f a F ry w NCE fO , U J w Oooe = a EEd E o w Wa. I n = m O 'to c Om 02 2 ' :6,' � J z ' z o G a- J O m og ,nmYE ` mvE !! _ $ mt ory --' C z < a ¢ o 3 . 3 Oa . 2_ = 50; 01- a N a 3 `o a N <000000 ui ¢ 1100 0 0000 ri LLM0 O ■ 0 0 zti m N z o U b wwfr E z ` b O Jo \ \8 \m 7 p d smi o i h ' oS9 L IT" CD oo & o Z ° g •, _J ; n 0 \ i o o .EE W n S o w W 1 m o f E 5 g F «ryry o e g n Pd 0 .Y E u w m i o z Z Iv i a2 .:o 8 € 6 88, e m t t Y n _ 0 12 0 ,..2 .9 p U U •w a c a t h A q.E g g Q w i $ 9 N % fm m mN 3 $ 'a E q\T D m `o . .. 0 O E w��o $Q a \ `\\ u re w W e;ne 3 \ I- $ A t C ‘-.` in 0 f zz 0 in n_ hH$ � O w H z 2 s i N re o. J �4 aotn Vp 3 R a� 2 -�`� u � U Z O r Sr JZ < c� O u115F, d 2 ¢ w a oz_ F Z T U d' p W ~ ¢ z Q m 0 0 $ Yi b F `� \ Ft J m O F w w to U ¢ p f Q c= c LL o �' ` m C 6 °ia Qzww < o � > _ i a € 2 o Yi O $ , �.4 U ,40 co a = N w 3 OU ,7_ 0 ¢ e w h .3 a. .3 a 8 8 m 3 XI y O Z S U `$ > N N .4_ 1., O t. E 0P0,0C o WW gOEz 3gJ:I 01 y . .-Wop ( 1-- � N w Q 1 5 E, o W L fn 9 ~?$ } i''-' K } N FS _ =o > y 2 m U mU`o N J g O O 7 m F ¢ U "1100- " y W , o N m WO W m 3 w o ZZZv JM O 0 0 X It"z NN551 5 ¢ m e- E o aZ ! 1,,,.. i aZZ1' So m p o W F a` w w U y m o > O W m z a X X X X U X m a E % 2 o - <x< y X .61- 3 .182 w w w a WW 0 W W W - a OS a } } } z T T aWQ 2 E z. E eN ‘-.4wy .� n ig € r E 0 W " ! 0 W N cNw r N U LL _ flO 5 5' < Si3 - _ , o fn 8 y o a g t N O il w £ : `m' v 36 04� 'n rcNormi o $, .: LLN 6 u' aay. `,_ '1.220 , a - U reZ @2 -3 ` v t q 8 $ rn o 9 e c d Em Ei eo aB § ; cn omd' G ' . m !d5. ! bi . mr1m 73 3—g- = !" :0 ! o d $ vL 3 wt, ognsmm Em oza ? O E m a p a m n m a Z w.15 Eoo ro ca € "Sv ; - a Emm 'I cNm 9 § m cm clj ii `n g5 - E mE c $ amO ocoo $ m ; w lcLL o„ $ N d0 ir ZOra - " i - O OSZKawa0QU) No 2 o 2 LLQ '$ Z w O 0 } 3 3 6 T O u Z 2 O z C P m z l7 z O _ m O O 5 . 3 9 > 3 Z = > N Z W g = 1" 2 ." N $ O Z _ N $ m K ° S 5 3 m 3 re OLL o. N O C7 M jZ O . . . 0r v1 0 0 0 0 0 . 'J \� Q Km o fr.. 6 %- k, �� eCe Q h .- \ �,o Z Um iY > p V �� '� W V C1� w a e' e' $ LL r V . \' Pk Ill" 'O , - y y fD N W ' '' _wwww M g ' EE '2 17 Z $ 08 1 a ~ 't .. o m m o . . . . a W 1 I is t2g E E N C K '�' X ' .2 " `= 8 8 5. p `o m Z. • C K g 5 3a : 3aci - V- " - x E W o 20Z y a p -Bi `' X g z A m g o h Fes-J 1 W W W N m O. > > > E r, N 0 s o $ rq $ O u E E E E E -. Oa U at 0 u £ o '4'' 'dm '� 227E o O LU u g n W X g o s a U 0 Q - oo � wz a O) Q n @ o r - r r W 61 °,W ' x Y 4 CO z m .0m W N lV N N ' 0) Bii v X LLO m e m £ .. H N m m U Eu« .. 2 § vyi . .« . ° E . O ip uri u .y $ �i 1---.174 .g 'S 3 " , L c E E "3 m z `fie V!. .1- " ii - u E E " o n 5 } 3 qaof a ii'o —'o g. E tt u ffi c g x $ $ a s ' '` a g WJ p v o -5 6 e E z c w,E a W Z g a E. to, c 2 u - 5 8 �°B o 2 € M l S .W e i 5 D u_ g EggIT-:--- 0 2 o .c $ g N a S 5 5 %--- - o 1- - o - ,.4 CJ ILL 3 U c O a Z Z ,1? a li 41 U R' z z CN ¢ co N W _ - I U) CO N z N W CI' CO Q 0 N'siOZ W O ¢ -N1 0 p w co ¢ w N i Ili w o V j z W p a 2 \ I. Z m Y 3 g 3 = rn p 2 N O o U 0 W a - Q Q et ca Z Z 1 I I I 1 I 1 I I I I I \'-� J .1 O Zw w i w w X O ZJmtnZozoa LL iii 2 2 zzO LLI 6 O ¢ 0 wLU<Cw7�0J0mww QQ N W 0 F- Z w JpNa¢a Jltl Z0 CC 0 0 O w ¢ ¢Namap� o O O O < a CO ��az��zQ�� ON¢ZF'--= W N U o O- Wmowow3�WOa C w }i-xZawOdoso LL Z W co wQ ZZ,wOaa'Z W H a N o gt0 aw>�O ZFOw a co N po_ L Z Z a m Z w— of cw7 pop a a = oco‹�IIzLuN>UQ¢ z Z Q Q .4-. maLp1¢ZU)— m v Y� Q Q¢ F-mF¢ ¢2Z a AO Z ~ amoi¢a3��ww z 0 CD a 0 CO H wO ¢J3¢yrW0 w woo0 �Q mDk. r•._ a Un -- E -I (1) fn QORZLLNF-¢wW = 20oN V ONOf Op �2 wF� � z3wW _ vop �J � oo° = oaW U. Lu cc CC LU i. fa- Z V) 0140,5wPcro2M1-- ... „, Z WF2< W>3o¢g0 a WIii paaVN20Z ¢ N ZO z in z , O �a<Ua ”'WW A ¢ O D cZ¢a ? LUa. a a O o°S� ozw?oLa U a a V Z�Fa-I"jU W co Z rn UJ OZNZ¢LLZZtW4ux a 4 wUWZ2yawZx~tn G CC a Z > 3: a O to� Q co y j p W W w-85 j=w UJ Z�i m La 1a0CaLU02~CL NZZJ et ar Z a W Z 2OZ p O¢LLO J J V D 414).., �NZF.zpz5m O �/ !+{I gypie wiz}�omY�}oQa as o I 1 O Z oa °LLuSuJ�� o D, ,4� / ,. '� i ii Z c) X01->'wF,2��Z ) J Y U i1i d- ¢ �z'i ¢ w 0 V LL Z 0 a0W Ua°- .lEIL �UJ J2 0O 0 0 a woo O ~ a O . �O 0 Q m¢aZ-o<0?mU vJ 3 141165L-BOD.Whin.DNLLNItld 3DI57VNY3 d301:1031:l TO: NANTUCKET BUILDING DEPARTMENT ,//� / FROM: LINDA F. WILLIAMS,ADMINISTRATOR / NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEAL DATE: October 31, 2006 RE: Lot 9, Type M-2 RUGGED SCOTT 40B ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS This Application for a building permit is related to a lot contained within the Rugged Scott LLC 40B project as granted in the Decision in BOA File No. 051-03. A copy of said Decision is on file with your department. Under the 40B legislation,the Board of Appeals acts as the Nantucket Historic District Commission("HDC")for the initial approval and the HDC staff has been charged with final sign-off of the structure's compliance upon completion of the construction project and prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. Any changes to the structure after that are also under the sole purview of the HDC unless the Board of Appeals finds that the change is a substantial change from what was approved. This house, applied for under said Decision,will be sited on Lot 9, and the building type is Cottage M-2. In accordance with the Decision and my ability to sign off on the individual designs as the project progresses in my capacity as the Zoning Board of Appeals Administrator, I have reviewed the plans attached with the building permit application and hereby find that they are consistent with those approved during final review at the meeting on Friday, February 24,2006. 1n IcZ Z JJ 0 L Q W W D N .. .11 ZLLI �'Jr� 9 I .... I til_ •--- I ,�_ I •__ II -r 1,r, Milli' :.0.11' �� 1I , ( 1 �� i �R1 ':1!j'i1`Ili�i i I�I I �dilliall '�'' IiI!I'lull! 1 '411 1111 I rENE iipAl 1 O b MOM...011 111.1.11j111,,;1w r �� r ti U!j�Piti:. �'I IIMI i; 1 ■L:iLI Milgig 2 - ( it it r : r 1 'i yla•rl.1 Il I�� ''� I1 i Lb- 3 ■ I: .1■ r 1■ IIIkI 4;:: :; Lit 1! I 1 , i `;, i 4 11 . t 1 1,.y ,i►I� •1 ' . \i'l, g CI"�4 11', :::: IIII� � �i f -- ,,y��q � � I' Illil �� r� �� • �q�Nomi�y�,,�I Igl1�I4 I'rl tI � ,I !! •,� "••1'1 .. 11.11 ...i lit ri i t L Ii ■ ��!1:01 ��( 1 jiii /11+11.11:fi ■1111 1 1 t .- r, '. 1.114 a.Nol ;q1 .1.1 Or git 1 . ii. il,,!,,:,, -ii: 01 �IWIM��' i�i�'�'I r�,'II y� 1.4109611 I JJ -1 �I{ �� F . I , 11114414111111;E•il �1); lel ' 4 z m p��Fj rillekilil=r: Irl. lilp � ,1Ij i:11.J1 .a; ' rlh'1 _. jp�mIalW II Illt' z PI rId.r., ....,,„,,„11 �Pa : Aii.4 -Il i4J!11ide•-1�� I �''1�■' i' ��. �� 1 l,�ii•1�1'ld,ile�.II L•• 1. 1! a�1 b_1' 1.1_II.114v11!i! we '•• ■INN ■. ■ •1!Imow w 1; , Elm NMI �• 1. J ■ Q nl,ipp the f Emmylir qii ,i, rce I � •r .,I;uy ; a,. Ilii I� ��I I �G!_.IWWII11.i0 .ta�� • d0■. Ii! i _%f I�li�ilji I IZ 1 f I I. 1ypE � 14: 4° .e (A ce ZW 5 g Z o 0 I I p 13 OI O 13 D N W 1 iE 1 r.,tii_ 1.ii ,_._ 1 I 1 I s ig tEl IIIlial i . 1 f-i. , k,,,,,. 1:-1 IN 1 . i.. kl 1 1 IT ; / . _ =_._- , - BF 3 V I f _.-.._. 1 _ _.._..-.. __-._-_•- O 0 0 !DIEM ) 1 ..., . '- rI a 1i d o • E Certificate No: OP-2012-0288 Building Permit No.: BP-2012-0128 Commonwealth of Massachusetts Town of Nantucket Building Electrical Mechanical Permits This is to Certify that the ALTERATION located at Dwelling Type 6 FOX GRAPE LANE in the TOWN OF NANTUCKET Address Town/City Name IS HEREBY GRANTED A PERMANENT CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY Finish basement of DU for gym, office& recreation room CO for permit 255-12 M/P 67-808 This permit is granted in conformity with the Statutes and ordinances relating thereto. Issued On:Wed Jul 25,2012 )5(2) lZ Q j C° GeoTMS6 2012 Des Lauriers Municipal Solutions,Inc. EJ " 00 0 00 w o a E w o EmilA z rW a 00 N g 5 4w za Z Q a r.-Y.Fos, 10* A (co F y pc� Ex w z P+ 4.1 Z w Flaad ri:4 C.,! c1) � ! ''x w z x Z vi �� co) :adt 44 F-ii c � wH � wOzwg O oWo O End v a '„h� a,oww U . O Wd a da � zx O cc:pp E'4 [ ' ~ 4111VHx a o �xz o 4 .� w z H Ha zwdAOd a o a F. v) dzgo. xA oz zz ° EgO H 4 W v ›, ao Ha ~ o VoE ( U U A zxE. 0E-i � W zr:4 ,_ = d O Z :., ! w O4.1.•z H O a A ! zw � zAA UOA Oito w" NUw iw) wo4 A E. O w o d �O Oi zA � z IQ ao Aa. *I* E� z � � Q a WxFdzAc zwE1 = c - vu x cdo C fisois • g v)lomi 014 z */10 Fil 4Wa., dWaa Piz � � o a Uaaz E�a vwzd oaHv vo � w � oddg H Sii wx o N [5z Iti g4 Q w Ap. O -,q' ti2 U ° . z O v � � u L.) xAHdr4W 541E. . , .. 0,., c:, E-idxU . az E- xldE. 0 U E-+ i i w ' i N e>„ i 11 H a 4 U 0.4 a a a a s c� a ab = W" z c �. d Q d a z z z Q O f < 4 4 4 O 4 w w 0 4, p 4 4 ,.a O Z Z O p O Z z T., w w x w H V) a w a wz. w w g �, c"-_. w w~ a w 1 g w pa r U z + A H • x 1 W4 E4r w44 o ws zw U ate, w � H H w 4 4 A z ‘ a w4 rz z �.. A a a w oA = 02 c I i 1 IL a LC w ¢ oa m U ,[ �_ 2 0- a 0 0 z _cc a 1 11 ` u ? am 2 I Za W o ��1 — r v •.o x• o w E °o ._ i ¢ v 2 _d mo ¢ m N < a Z y; N 4 00 ¢ < < - w _ - I 0 0 0 cil cif/ ((� o Z O O E O O tC _ Eo a U O O t U m v I ' /� ci g LL o a u. O u m ¢ Z Z O ¢ E E o O m - ma J Z Z LL O O iLL F- h- LL q o 1.1..1 C ✓J 2 v o /� 0 ;I7 ¢m, W2 c n pi^��. �.� G7 o u " ¢ so n m o WZ C D !� y N F- ..es -:� u Q C.J Z - y i0 W O 2 O O J N a g ° a= a j1 N u v ¢ m c N a m mY1a t a O al S • O < m? -IL' o LI OZ e .� ° _ O u. -3- • s Q u o - ¢ 0 In Nm Cm O m W 1,- = Z « L ` J 6 Z ' " J m a \I_ v O an > a > O cz a4 3 O < O N >O a ay r ~ s m u. a f O = O 7 zn _ x m 9 O , o a c m O 0 fn \-L N o 2 F W Z _N g J 7 < 2 w ? ,-,, 2 L ' 9 z ,, m I F g .J O ¢ o LL z d 0 W B. W x a -, 0 a w O w Ui Z N ¢ a. w W < , 3 N y w _ < 0 O T a Z > a w O < O E o I U a Si: m o CD1 O ¢ aa,, m o m `� I C F w S .2' 1 Z 2 m Iiio. W a m o m E ; m W w m y J 7 7 u W m O 0 Q u- ° m co N E E v S 0 n U a w m a Z W O m o o " �, O , N n g a v W U - • U Cr F a w m a o . a-a E LL O o` E - w c a J o Z Q a 3 v a, a E O m v o o m c $ `°o f W d o t ¢ m V -! v v v v o ¢ v c ; c v m N o 2 i6 - !- z < Q ¢ O 2 a O ui 4 2 cn o a 0 � y a 3 0 a 0 O O r -IOm cv < 7 7 7 7 0 0 uia at 70 O 0070 I O W V O 0 * 7 7 Z I m `•1 `� E r u o va o RS m v1 L`O Z O z rcE U I, .j -1 1°, d.� -� I- E Z ,� U HL w co 0 0 m N o CC < -Cl `Sv a m gm w T V�© N 1� .J '3 n n w 0 a C `" m a c- Zl'a w _, I , o. v r L • n a t1/4.0, NtqnT7' U) g = mN a {m 1, n v o m w 8 n<\ Jm E ~ h D O 0 Qyo aZ -f Eo O N EJ p �.. t' _a g g • J • ? om) qC� ¢ m y�a6S Q ` m'a s6 6 •- Fm o W c. a J 'm m v 1- • m aG -Y L t; irc io c \i Q C p ,u o m m II ,/-• JJJ EOI Q f7 O Z ¢ Ntt V ^ W N u' O- 7) W e D 6 ¢ aa nL �i O n O m '� E L E o m O- c O g O N p m Q- V o� O W U H o ¢' n ¢ v vm a i3 5 0 . QV61h g Ud ¢ S < �Z 0 J p 8 a`G1� 'J , j > Q fr OLL Zt ¢ 6 u.,_, <- <Q F a o � m U a co UQ ?o Z 8 a, 22 = FE N m w m H O w € v£ m e • o m m v m m F a m N w W < O ¢ <O J J m m m m h c v :d t (17 a` !D d 2 (A (� 3 U L.T. O ¢ a W ri CO'a CO a 0 U ,y{ c c �0., c�i 0 ci 0 LL W ' '6-6 o N N Z c2a O.-F, d Z O C , z 1°. I w E H ro v a, o N > S f a¢y y Z =U' �` _ N¢ a1 C m a' ( E m = 1 at d 3 c c O • HZ�c-m v of o • ?"� 'awl >- 2. a as v _ c a n d m a ° 2 v5 ' V°- < Z - • ym Z _ • O wEI .• co o z ' I 1a " _ A c ' I - .. aod d .g N N c = ____,/ a F, -2 c m a a o Z 1 ov < Q > I U . ° O m « . f ,aY6- ' Ib 3 J O u d z r o j czc _ lc c mz a 0 E N _ _ - C o Z L p W c " I "J. = -1- a C N°N z ¢Q 1 O -.= = Z' 1 a3 10 U W w 1 i 6 •• •_ V < ~ N 2 ¢ > ° - a t� w0 m 1 m , ` s o - c a t d m i N n 3 a I a y ti 3 a 2 Ft d ao w o 3 0 a, m _ _ a E n > z o m ? .3 o E a v d N C < d Z. Z O a .. T6 U S 9 0 a, W m _ _ o ov O an d 12 aZ a w.. h '. J U U C N 3A E ca mOo ' 1 m I z o N Y a, E m . a6Z m O 0 n m .L a € o p3 ' g 2 a m m Z z a v 3 8 ` an ° O x-a ° of oo U mE . ° hifiz c < o roc2 2y m 3zW33 ° '' - Ym Y vJ 3caoya c E mj o 9 a p aa3u € _ O o� oaZo ° O7, mN c �Oa ¢ , mea y mo z ° >f N o o 7 ¢ fy N0 2 c F .2 O a c o a E m 3 i o a m 3 Z ,-Z c 2 c a., > m d m cmw Nmmc, EzS o = m a, E ` m m m r Gm r O NO ON o Q . ry a oy > Z i t -G) ' D '- N a 3 . 32 - R N 2 - N aniuao zo a - x - ooxzoa` N < o < N O ..i, - ,, = ¢ _ _ ae ?N LU 2c 0 2 - G dO — C 2 w 2 o O 0 5 t < I-1- 8 Ys w cn c •` ` w Y L m a a a - W 2 p N N N N .� 4 ') ¢ E ° N E E E E o CC '- m -8 8 8 in z o a v d • a E p toa, ` to- .D > iuin', n n t a .k vvi 3 O O@ E E E E - m EEEE o 1 3(J a O m m mv m u av W .. v 0 2 o 8 1 d U To t 0 z . • �1 m = 'Rv_ m o a V CF- O wza a dN vYm m o E .N .. um 'i - m a a 3 F $° . y iw y .' 0 o w S m $ E2 E8"¢ 'm > a O z 2 w av •c E Eo pO 5 c < UbE mE .E y cr< EE 2j i - O - C N C " 3 C' u_ ¢ os < d � w = ,:g, uu m .0 a� aE W 0 Z w c 713 y J Q g a E ° ° 0 D E LL m < < O `o - m o < m` m g m m `w d o m oo p V W w • U O d <t7, 3 c .7 4. N U ¢ 2 F 6 Z u! u.¢ Z ! - Certificate No: OP-2007-0423 Building Permit No.: BP-2007-0378 Commonwealth of Massachusetts Town of Nantucket Building Electrical Mechanical Permits This is to Certify that the GARAGE located at Dwelling Type 6 FOX GRAPE LANE in the TOWN OF NANTUCKET Address Town/City Name IS HEREBY GRANTED A PERMANENT CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY CONSTRUCT 316sf SINGLE CAR GARAGE CO FOR PERMIT 440-07 M/P 67-808 This permit is granted in conformity with the Statutes and ordinances relating thereto,and expires unless sooner suspended or revoked. Expiration Date Issued On: Mon Aug 13,2007 G/sem amu.. GeoTMSO 2007 Des Lauriers Municipal Solutions,Inc. \:.o F- Z W V) J �C V) , Q = 0HZ Q OCQ o tl< tilli O = ~ Z 0 OZ w °' 0 � � J WOC � O - aw ro Z - — cn a 2. 0 V a m Q O = WI= W Z U �. 0 Imi. ot'` WOaV20c� � a u. 2 a ` JLLI m aQF- 00 oz 1.z 2 w < 0 1- w O ~ F- c02WF- 1 Z Ww N WW Q � -LWaO wou. z 1:1C 2 ,�0 \i0mvaOg ww zp � Oo = a � � Q Ilmml OLIU `, � wOoCnZZ F- QZ QI . < Dp JO- NwZU CC .— O Z 0m b F- Z CC i- U M r 0_ OQHWm zr' a 1- 13 OWQ D co O., r • . ccaZcocw � w U co/) Z u. w I Z OWgr pop o ooI_ z � � ° o _ � 4 !y0 0Q wQ Z . U Zit U. � O OZ Q Li' = pUQ �VZc�)) WZ c� Z 20 c OWQ � Q WC c - - 1- ) 2 m —IM Lli cU z = > OZ • w8ZZw 20 � w2U1 -§ w ? wm a'm' Q 0. ~ Y >- 00 w O oz I = a zv O0 QJ a ~ ' w I ~ p � aQ � I'" mmill h � I UIWw , zoo () UM D Z _ oZ rz jc Z Op. -1 c) U)) z MOLL Zn w O COVJWZ OW 2Za = a bI cn Seci10� ? ~ O pwwZ QZ ~ Q �= co 13 ,O zoU� cc in � I- z0 E0w CCwo i ° 000 T w cn Q w U 0 1-- a w z E_ a cn a T. Zeno G. zw � � � Q ouw Wm wW0F_ w W_ aww O 2 W IJP ~ Vw = w < — a~c Z F- a F- LLOZ cc cc F- alai ~ v z< D._ 4 A 1:\ 0 ri... Li-i] t • to d §„, N el 14. X) cc O �, 4 w Ncn � Z , I z >- i cc 1 I4-1 512 - o U O CC w a Q JZ M D cc D uj ZDQ 2DQ Q Q QQODW Q E. CCC I-- U)COC LI COC LI 11 Z Z Q LL LI OU_ OU_ cc z L N. E O z i__ II cc w �l a. NO �.0,H - 0 W = Z Z 0 w (� Z H• J Z� 2 Z 0 z o Q w w �O Q a C,C, o 5 CL w z 0 am n. § 0 I N m 0 Wm a a m a K f 0 ; Z z n z u. O ♦ U a o i w <CO . t7 y o 2 a ` w m E C _ S o z m m z Y ¢ E o _ N... - F - 3 p y z. Y d I p ai ` w = 3 c e s 1 1 a u> v ri 'j ck_▪ aU � tW. __ O C7 v O $ xZZOSZZ • Z C P o 011 D 0 y z y 2 _ `e, u J Z 5 1� 3 ° 32 ¢- Z- 'ya m N 2 d z8 -.7: 2 :-. - .5 r y 3 a o a p E L rG v LL U y d -+ u Q O O u in f N a Z ? o w� N W XI m C CC wa ,.7 , y L o p j o O I ga U �, ;; a E J m w m c >- �_ r O > a Q [[ u un E ¢o = o y - 0 0 Z (� a - 2 0 0 < w V) E m 2 a o x Wim' 3 - } 3 K LL in b u N N N 3 U O Z y 3 31 r, - I _ C m z _ y 0 5 0 w = t O l_- ',i m 3 a o < _ > > a -E u .n o a a O r m 1 a' d F a w mz z Q m•❑ of oP u. IMOD _C^1- zo a s a O 0 y z g,' a z v W`� _ 1 a „ o y /i o Lll CL 0 a m W 08 aYO O 1- w - a E g Od �O Fw a � � y O wzo 4=- LLI m Z F Z o, - 0 - . tii T 4 p - W r L U - hw Q D CC OO WWoaom O _ q E LL 5 ` a g 9 cza • - =z _ - '9 s V 0 C. - a S nE 's ¢ v 0 u _ - a 2r m rz ' aco & as on - = i o ,t0ag dl 30 cu 2.El y 2 rwn \` 1 t- m U m n E = h' E w 88 c d III• ..n' J [,„.[,„.;1.z £ to ' I , os : a 3 s a • a O c u a ' 1sILI ES m • 2 cE a W a • g m o E o u ' E o z , o f u ~ �! E O y < E Z Z t. m ; 1 1' «2 y a o• - n w O ¢ 3 K 0 a v` fd € rG h a .E T 5 : �T G o O 'e m _ m y I < Q=, a,a y , y m y C01 a3 m f n m m N Q E - _ 0 c1 Y v LL z ¢ _ a E L - 0 2 a E O 'rn w E 2, = n m N DL ph V ,�_z" � qt `n C chi tiorc y OQV C p < 3 5'' 2 o V G =_ ¢ J = ' s 3 u i a = wwaomDmw > E o f u) O o ri U n U io3xmrnOZaw F. ma ' a -A n zxI \ s.asA o 44 E cz `a-8 yw Oz da rcFA1o z 3 on N NK9N NI CNWOva I W NLL F } a 2 o E !>_o > — aE eSo 0 ci m 0 ¢ U A . cn r m y n N O _.41. t de L. c F` J E ci '� a 3 290 o c a a .. O U x 2" - o N E z m `o 1 $ - a ;� -cool goat o N . aZ •m zzzt U9 z� m w F y a_ w mm p WB 9 , 8 3 ' x x x x o • ii om `oE y N N <O U co 2-g '23m g J = L S P n € u < m n _i F,s o g4 - A § 0 E m t £o O u g w " N o U m L J m ; ,� m o K 5 U N .W n y N - n 0. `o q; u m m a - U K 748 Z S m m ` o y> 5 .3 E-LL t g 3 o 0w c _ . cy D O i v` o = a a ii S na _ = 'm ` gt ii • � ! EE g ag m Q2 / �- a 2- U U m € a N N cgm o • 8LL ` do v ; o m c :l ` o £ a J o5zaoO ¢ m a 1 $ 3 Oq . ow Ivvo ; 9 av• ow 124.n. m ( 11 %- . .Mg ,', aaw aE g € S § € 5 _ oom wE i. 5 ' El m '= S O " m > kaUl ¢ UQNO N wutw m y c� ` < O 14Nlia oZzF ^ - _ ozzz z > O rm33au - 2O o & z o 3aEm= E zUm 2 Z W m 33 22 w N _3 w a o 52 73. 0 4 O o 0 Q N 2 0 F 15 0 5 zzzz� c K 2 - - E EE E E N o a u ,i E « Z6 .2 R '3 . .4 m V a@ 72722 N a E g . 2 E E : "g O. N x '� " o a r o c 5 E o ▪ a $ C LE a. • o11 I E - y R EO ¢ c x A 6 6 c aZ Z ym ' Wh Nm mS SEES « N .. ` EEEEE 0 G m fi = 0 !i, . H m m f m 2 0 O 0 2 m '3 W x 3 C < N = 0 3 2 U - o z z z `z 2 E LLO ' a � � = (-a x - z ~W o " =W w t) m mtco a (-3 O m n 14 "' ai m ii o m m N 44 ._ 1x =" s n s t .Q ; w _ _ E E 8 h o r m - _ 2 f. a < t.w E G 'S m � 0 o 4 U t e a, E 0)o b 8 E `ra C V L > _ e IL G N EL - v v • a L.- a 'a z' c m a t= 7 z - = 253 .c g - E kYk m o 0 Z 0 15 o K m p.. :! ,0 0 2 t s m s zr <R Z K O 5p 3 rn$ o 9 u`. e 2 N 0 w = _ ., 685 € ' 5 !to y, v —_ . . .so . 6 ,2303oam ia ..- t c ¢ z • i' T _ '.., N A _ r-? ' 2020 .:iu.) 13 Ph' 12: 04 TOWN OF NANTUCKET BOARD OF APPEALS NANTUCKET, MA 02554 MEMORANDUM Date: August 10, 2020 To: Town Clerk From: Eleanor Weller Antonietti, Zoning Administrator Re: File No. 51-03—INSUBSTANTIAL MODIFICATION to Comprehensive Permit Rugged Scott—Lot 9 (6 Fox Grape Lane) The above referenced Comprehensive Permit was granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals to Rugged Scott LLC, filed with the Town Clerk on February 13, 2006, and recorded at Book 1010, Page 1 \kith the Nantucket Registry of Deeds. At its meeting on July 9, 2020, the Zoning Board of Appeals made a determination that a requested modification entailing the installation of an in-ground residential swimming pool on Lot 9 (6 Fox Grape Lane) is deemed insubstantial. Please file the attached letter detailing this approval with the original Comprehensive Permit File No. 051-03. Thank you. eanor W. Antonietti, Zoning Administrator COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS County of Nantucket, ss On the Z day of 4 ` j , 2020, before me, the undersigned notary public, personally appeared Eleanor W. 44 tonietti, the above-named Zoning Administrator of Nantucket. Massachusetts, personally known to me to be the person whose name is signed on the preceding document, and acknowledged that she signed the foregoing instrument voluntarily for the purposes Tat*i n expressed. M.al Signature and Seal ofo. o Public /, My Commission E�ires December 17,2021 My commission expires: 2 Fairgrounds Road Nantucket Massachusetts 02554 508 -228 -7215 telephone 508-228 - 7298 facsimile o N. Nantucket Zoning Board .of 41s , y�, , July 31, 2020 Nancy Holmes Town& County Clerk 16 Broad Street Nantucket, MA 02554-3590 Re: Lot 9; Plan No. 2006-61 Map 67, Parcel 808 6 Fox Grape Lane Insubstantial modification Rugged Scott 40B Dear Town Clerk Holmes: The above-referenced architectural modification relates to a lot created as part of the Rugged Scott LLC 40B Project as granted by the Decision in Zoning Board of Appeals File No. 051-03, known as the "Comprehensive Peiniit for the Rugged Scott LLC 1 Development". A copy of said Decision, as well as two subsequent "Clarification and Technical Correction"decisions issued in 2008, are on file with your department. At the Zoning Board of Appeals ("the Board")meeting on July 9, 2020, David S. Gesner and Julie A. Gesner, owners of 6 Fox Grape Lane by virtue of deed recorded at Book 1611, Page 116, requested a deteimination that a proposed modification to the construction program upon Lot 9 may be considered an insubstantial modification to the Comprehensive Permit, as amended, and the plans approved therewith, pursuant to 760 CMR 56.05 (11)(a)(b), and as such, may be authorized by the Board. The proposed modification for which applicant sought and received approval is: • To the extent necessary, regarding Lot 9 : o Modification of the Comprehensive Pelniit and consent to siting and installation of a 23' x 9.6' private residential swimming pool and related hardscaping upon Market Rate Lot 9 as shown upon"Foundation As-Built Plan",prepared by David Maddigan, P.L.S.; dated July 16, 2007, and "Schematic Layout Plan", prepared by Jardins Intl., Inc., dated June 16, 2020, each submitted in connection with the request and attached herewith as "Exhibit A" and`Exhibit B",respectively. 2 Fairgrounds !toad • Aiiiucket. MA 02551 51_18,228 x'215 eIeplhonc• • 508.228 7298 facsimile :73�a/iueK 9 . Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals y, co9pagA�`°.: Section 760 CMR 56.05 (11)(a)(b), for your reference, reads in relevant part: (11) Changes after Issuance of a Permit. (a) If after a Comprehensive Permit is granted by the Board, including by order of the Committee pursuant to 760 CMR 56.07(5), an Applicant desires to change the details of its Project as approved by the Board or the Committee, it shall promptly notify the Board in writing, describing such change. Within 20 days the Board shall determine and notify the Applicant whether it deems the change substantial or insubstantial, with reference to the factors set forth at 760 CMR 56.07(4). (b) If the change is determined to be insubstantial or if the Board fails to notify the Applicant by the end of such 20-day period, the Comprehensive Permit shall be deemed modified to incorporate the Change. 2 The Board made a finding that the above-referenced proposal, upon the condition that the pool and related equipment be sited outside of the twenty-five (25) foot Habitat Management Area Easement with a No Disturb zone to the rear and otherwise in full compliance with the setbacks as they apply specifically to Lot 9, may be considered an insubstantial modification. Accordingly, the Comprehensive Permit and the plans approved therewith are deemed duly modified to reflect this change. Respectfully, Susan cC. y, ' . • Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals 2 1-iirgrounJs ito.td • NAnuickct. 5114. ' 't; -X15 ccicphunc • =08.228 ?97; l..c+imiic I'EXI-E-A- THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED FOR THE TOWN OF NANTUCKET BUILDING DEPARTMENT ONLY AND SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED A PROPERTY L.NE SURVEY. THE BUILDINGS ARE I\I • ��i 1 LOCATED AS SHOWN. 1 , Ch% ' k ,: , ltker!it:r511101L-1 !,1 '‘k/SUREY0 z-zDA E "qi®� ®_ '' SITE DESIGN REGISTERED PROFE ONAL SURVEVOR6 DATE I I � �/ � � v ^� O ' ENGINEERING,LLC. �/ NW" f;FNFRAL NnTF( `'- f �� /� i BUSHMAN STREET MIDDLEBORO,MA 07346 1.MS PLM'IS BASED ON AN APPROVED 9JBON9CN OF I /- YAP b]LOS 170.1701,170.2 4 1703;AS SLtOMR ON L, T:SOB-967-0673 F:508-967-Q674 THE ORIOAL TAX MAPS O THE TOW.OF NANTUCKET, ■ W W W.SITEDESIGNENG CAM \ y.� SEE DEFINITIVE SUBDIN90N PLANS AT RUGGED ROAD AND ��tiQN lava � '.. SCOTTS COAT NANTUCKET,MASSACHUSETTS DATED • 44' JANUANY 25,2006 AND REUSED R:]INARY 22,2WS; PREPARED SI CBY TON EOFNAN1IIC CO.,INC.',APPRpKD I CUU INAN AND DID11R5©BY TONN OF NANTUCKET 2OMNG BOARD OF APPEALS CN 2/24/06. Ca ENGINEERING >•,: 2 THE 0111ER OF RECORD IS RUGGED SCOTT-LLC c/o LOCUS KEY MAP SCALE: 1' = 200' ai , RISK TOE DEVELOPMENT,32 ARLINGTON STREET 'Z.:�� '�`� 7/ �'' /! CANBRIDC{MASSACHUSETTS 02140. : " .1-1 �.=-7•`1"� p J(M7Wf.TAPAF '��1 �/ 3.TINS PLAN AND THE ACCOMPANI1NC C,3111EAIEM 00 NOT RONREL 450,. y Jt�'E,9{� Rw CONSTITUTE A CERTb10AlI0N OF ITS TO T11E PROPFRT' LO'NEA 4.000-'5,000 SF. 7,919 S.F. RD ��111--- 0 DISPLAYED HEREON.THE MDR OF RECORD AND DF '._OT AMA NRIE NONE !BUTTING PROPERTIES AREA SHOWN ACCORDING TO 'ROUT TAD SE1BAd. MW.5 FT/10 FT. 14.5 F. I 'b ' CURRENT TOWN ASSESSORS RECORDS REAR YARD SETBACK 5 FL 7.6 FT. 3 C SARA TARO 00TBACK 5 i•. 76 R. I 0, MONO CURER RATY' 306.;376 S.F. 20.66.1,63'S.F. USE GENERAL 2 !//�� //� cINTENS TIS Q REMENTD ,ICTATED BY TCYMOF NANTUCKETVICINITY MAP SCALE: 1"= 1600' ZONING BOARD OF APPE.ALSSFFILE N0.051-03 DECISION. i i r i i � ' /. •,•r ? p LOT 43 �3�a I EXISTING HABITAT MANAGEMENT AREA PLAN REVISIONS ' EASEMENT 1 10 O 5 10 2„ TATE JULY 16,2007 4�'E I DRAwN Br: !vLcs.BY: cHEcx e6.. N3$� 10' SCALE 1 'NCI- = TO FEET LMGIDCM I RUM l TWH cF- CV • \0. 61 PROJECT NO.6013/20230127-10/102 I % ,\ 1 6 ISSUED FOR: APPROVAL )./''' , '/. 4.0 / - �POFAMl \o 67-808 A w i MADMAN LOT 9 <Ix / N LL; �Dswve� 7,919 S.F. = 0.18 Acres / 0 /' N A.B'- <> w J Z 8.4't / 2.5' / > I— z /! x LOT 7 • °i 2 ='— — L0I- D 00 N H < OI 1w DWELLING/ / 2 F DRIVEWAY Z W > 0 7.6.± P O / 2 PARKING E a 2 Z Q U- �",../ / i' r] SPACES LU N TOF=30.75 a 1 w OD Q cc z i / 24.ii �. J J M Q / / ''' 1— iv I-- w a Q a co co 4.2' r I Q I— °o o i' = LOT 11 w U 0 Y CC ac. c. w / i 1---- ----- a /i/i/iii//2715////////r '——— II- m LU F-- I- W L., It-„, _- O F PORCH \AR • — �. — rn d 6 S —, `I --- DN Z STEP ----- -..- / L.1.. - _ Y; - RAPS VAN� ` 1 1 G DRAWING TITLE: _ - 48"w - - FOUNDATION COMMON F� 5447' AS-BUILT PLAN EXISvNG EpSEMEKI / ,� - A-IA.34 6 FOX GRAPE LANE \• 71.34 SCALE: 1"=104 -1- UTILITY SHEET No. EASEMENT 67-810 LOT 10 OF 1 I----J I 1 4.418 S.F. I n-T- 1 r— I / _ ., "�� % -cam ' � � is„G • r i x nm'I y - _-"1" I 1 4- ♦ +- ... - } —, - a J E 23'-O`ou G P 1 -< _ -'- 23'X 6n9r n o0 r ,yr. r 10 t 1G tti r e C,, ." - iy��, I. 3. t 3 I I 3 { ___ _- - 1 - - --- -------- -= ox G ape r L-- (.1'SNIP R RFSIUFNCIf Schematic Layout Plan ti<i.rh --- -_ -- ----- -- - - F IANI" 1.-, �y 61 ON(;R4P NANILICK!..l. ,y •JDA i 1 NI N-02 SS4 -I., (///�/ tA/T{�,F� '.RDI'. 7�. 6( Bk: 01126 Pg: 37 , jiIN Bk: 1128 Pg: 37 Page: 1 of 3 Doc: DD 02/19/2008 03:49 PM DEED RUGGED SCOTT LLC, a Delaware limited liability company having its principal place of business in Wilmington, Delaware, for consideration paid in the amount of $1, 315, 000 . 00, grant to DAVID C. PRESCHLACK, of 600 Warner Hill Road, Southport, Connecticut 06890-3024, with QUITCLAIM COVENANTS, That certain parcel of land situated in Nantucket, Nantucket County, Massachusetts, together with the buildings located thereon, now known and numbered as 6 Fox Grape Lane, bounded and described as follows : NORTHWESTERLY by Lot 43 on plan hereinafter mentioned, seventy-three and 18/100 (73 . 18) feet; NORTHEASTERLY by Lot 11 on said plan, one hundred sixteen and 92/100 (116. 92) feet; SOUTHESTERLY by Lots 10 and 8 on said plan, seventy-one and 34/100 (71 .34) feet; and SOUTHWESTERLY by Lots 8 and 7 on said plan, one hundred nine and 30/100 (109.30) feet . Said land is shown as Lot 9 on plan recorded with Nantucket Deeds as Plan No. 2006-19, and also as Lot 9 on plan recorded with Nantucket Deeds as Plan No. 2006-61 . Said land is conveyed subject to the following matters : (a) Agreement and Stipulation for Entry of Judgment with Grant of Comprehensive Permit recorded with Nantucket Deeds in Book 1010, Page 1. (b) Covenant dated February 24, 2006, recorded with Nantucket Deeds in Book 1010, Page 46, as affected by Form J Release dated February 24, 2006, recorded with Nantucket Deeds in Book 1010, Page 113, as affected by Form J Release dated September 8, 2006, recorded with Nantucket Deeds in Book 1040, Page 66, as affected by Form J Release dated October 13, 2006, recorded with Nantucket Deeds at Book 1044, Page 244 . Bk: 01126 Pg: 38 Book 1010, Page 51, including but not limited to the right of the Owners Association Trust to impose maintenance fees and to promulgate and enforce rules and regulations. (d) Declaration of Restrictions and Easements dated February 24, 2006, recorded with Nantucket Deeds in Book 1010, Page 78, including but not limited to the restriction that no secondary dwelling shall be built upon a Building Lot, as affected by Amendment to Declaration of Restrictions and Easements dated July 31, 2007, recorded with Nantucket Deeds in Book 1095, Page 66. (e) Grant of Right of Enforcement of Restrictions dated February 24, 2006, recorded with Nantucket Deeds in Book 1010, Page 104 . (f) Facilities Maintenance and Endowment Agreement dated February 24, 2006, recorded with Nantucket Deeds in Book 1010, Page 108 . (g) Conservation and Management Permit dated January 17, 2006, recorded with Nantucket Deeds in Book 1037, Page 74 . (h) Regulatory Agreement dated February 24, 2006, recorded with Nantucket Deeds in Book 1044, Page 160, as affected by Amendment to Regulatory Agreement recorded with Nantucket Deeds in Book 1045, Page 271 . (i) Easement to Nantucket Electric Company dated January 24, 2007, recorded with Nantucket Deeds in Book 1066, Page 157 . (j ) Easement to Verizon New England, Inc. , dated January 24 , 2007, recorded with Nantucket Deeds in Book 1066, Page 164 . (k) Easement to Comcast of Massachusetts I, Inc. , dated March 8, 2007, recorded with Nantucket Deeds in Book 1070, Page 71 . (1) Real estate taxes assessed by the Town of Nantucket for the fiscal years 2008 and 2009, commencing on July 1, 2007 and July 1, 2008, respectively. For title, see deed recorded with Nantucket Deeds in Book 761, Page 53 . Bk: 01126 Pg: 39 Executed and sealed on February 20, 2008 . RuggecY'Scptt LjJC� By: 11 Joshua osner COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS r-ciek t, s s . On this \LS day of February, 2008, before me, the undersigned notary public, personally appeared Joshua Posner proved to me through satisfactory evidence of identification, which was ,v'A , to be the person whose name is signed on the preceding or attached document, and acknowledged to me that he signed voluntarily on behalf of Rugged Scott LLC,for its stated purpose. Notary !table i y, MASSACHUSETTS EXCISE TAX r - _3 ! Nantucket County ROD#16 001 /1( SHAMA M.STEW '�q; Date: 02/19/2008 03:49 PMNotaryPublic ' CtrIM 458422 25785 Doc# 0 456 CommonwealthMassachine44 Fee: $5,996.40 Cons:$1. 15,000.00 MY 03mnaIsiOn ExItireS F4.21,2014-. �^ rc — o Tom= • -1 ,7,4? -; l NANTUCKET!ANL;L;t i.,ti ri CERTIFICATE • rn iD Feld$ Ole/ 00 m a pExempt EINon-appficab/e g'8B7 �f1Q10 No. Cato I i I , I ♦_ Bk: 1611 Pg: 118 Page: 1 of 4 Doc: DD 09/29/2017 02:06 PM ST ATUTOR OUITCLADEED ED I,DAVID C.PRESCHLACK of 600 Warner Hill Road, Southport,CT 06890, for consideration paid in the amount of ONE MILLION EIGHT HUNDRED FIFTEEN THOUSAND and 001100 ($1,815,000.00),grant to DAVID S.GESNER and JULIE A.GESNER,as tenants by the entirety, of 20 Sturbridge Road, Wellesley,MA 02481,with QUITCLAIM COVENANTS, That certain parcel of land situated in Nantucket,Nantucket County,Massachusetts,together with the buildings located thereon, now known and numbered as 6 Fox Grape Lane, bounded and described as follows: NORTHWESTERLY by Lot 43 on plan hereinafter rmentioned, seventy-three and 18/100(73.18)feet; NORTHEASTERLY by Lot 11 on said Plan,one hundred sixteen and 92/100(116.92)feet; SOUTHEASTERLY by Lots 10 and 8 on said Plan, seventy-one and 34/100(71.34)feet; and SOUTHWESTERLY by Lots 8 and 7 on said Plan,one hundred nine and 30/100(109.30)feet. Said land is shown as Lot 9 on plan recorded with Nantucket Deeds as Plan No.2006-19,and also as Lot 9 on Plan No.2006-61 and contains 7,919E square feet according to said plan. Said land is conveyed subject to the following matters: (a) Subject to and benefited by the provisions of an Agreement recorded with the Nantucket Registry of Deeds on March 10,2006 in Book 1010,page 1. (b) Provisions of a Covenant in favor of the Nantucket Board of Appeals, dated February 24,2006 and recorded with the Nantucket Registry of Deeds on March 10,2006 in Book 1010,Page 46,as affected by various Form J Certificates of Completion and Release of Municipal Interest in performance security. (c) Provisions of a Declaration of Trust of Rugged Scott Owners Association Trust, dated February 24,2006 and recorded with the Nantucket Registry of Deeds on March 10,2006 in Book 1010,page 51. (d) Provisions of a Declaration of Restrictions and Easements dated February 24,2006 and recorded with the Nantucket Registry of Deeds on March 10,2006 in Book 1010,Page 78,as affected by an Amendment recorded in Book 1095, Page 66 at the Nantucket Registry of Deeds and further affected by an Amendment recorded in Book 1604,Page 205 at the Nantucket Registry of Deeds. (e) Grant of Right of Enforcement of Restrictions dated February 24,2006,recorded with Nantucket Deeds in Book 1010,Page 104. (f) Provisions of a Facilities Maintenance and Endowment Agreement dated February 24,2006 and recorded with the Nantucket Registry of Deeds on March 10, 2006 in Book 1010, page 108. (g) Provisions of MA Endangered Species Act (G.L. c. 13IA) Conservation and Management Permit No.005-069 DFW,dated January 17,2006 and recorded with the Nantucket Registry of Deeds on August 21,2006 in Book 1037,Page 74. (h) Provisions of a Regulatory Agreement for Comprehensive Permit Projects in which funding is provided through a Non-Governmental Entity, dated February 24,2006 and recorded with the Nantucket Registry of Deeds on October 13, 2006 in Book 1044, Page 106,as affected by an Amendment recorded in Book 1045,page 271. (i) Provisions of a Grant of Easement in favor of Nantucket Electric Company,dated January 24, 2007 and recorded with the Nantucket Registry of Deeds on February 12, 2007 in Book 1066,Page 157. (j) Provisions of an Easement in favor of Verizon New England, Inc., dated January 24,2007 and recorded with the Nantucket Registry of Deeds on February 12,2007 in Book 1066, Page 164. (k) Provisions of an Easement and Right of Way in favor of Comcast of Massachusetts, Inc., and dated March 8, 2007 and recorded with the Nantucket Registry of Deeds on March 9, 2007 in Book 1070,Page 71. (I) Matters shown on Overall Layout Plan recorded as Plan No. 2006-61 at the Nantucket Registry of Deeds,as affected by Overall Utility Easement Plan recorded as Plan No. 2007-05 at said Registry. (m) Special Permit dated May 9, 2008 and recorded with the Nantucket Registry of Deeds on June 13,2008 in Book 1142,Page 1. (n) Real estate taxes assessed by the Town of Nantucket for the fiscal year 2018 commencing on July 1,2017. For title,see deed recorded with Nantucket Deeds in Book 1126, Page 37. I,David C.Preschlack,hereby state that I am married to Alexandra Best Preschlack,who has signed below waiving any rights of homestead and that neither of us has an ex-spouse or civil union partner who occupies or intends to occupy the land as a principal residence or is entitled to claim the benefit of an existing of homestead in the property by court order or otherwise. Executed and sealed on this22 day of September,2017. vt . resc lac STATE OF CONNECTICUT Rtivfte CI ss• On this c a day of September, 2017 before me, the undersigned notary public, personally appeared David C. Preschlack, proved to me through satisfactory evidence of identification, which was his driver's license, to be the person whose name is signed on the preceding or attached document,and acknowledged to me that he signed voluntarily for its stated purpose and who swore or affirmed to me that the contents of the document are truthful and accurate to the best of his knowledge and belief. --4217711111ta Notary Public My commission expires:NANTUCKET GATE RAMC CEATmF1 Eau$340'3co. tilt SAMANTHA J. FRATTAROU a' q NEA*,Star ofCaaecket HNePf M S/ Tomitslo Win Octs ry Anti = • I-., AI/IOItf�011 0 Q 6 70 PCCC MASSACHUSETTS EXC1• T N Nantucket County R. - 018 001 • Date: 00/20/201 '2:08 PM o CtrIN 483059 - Doc! 00002915 ' , X11%,J.(IF!. Fee: $8.27•.40 Cons:$1.815.000.00 •• 7:, , • ,, -NJ,�S 3 1,Alexandra Best Preschlack,married to David C. Preschlack,join in this this Deed for the purpose of releasing any right of homestead that I may have in the property described above pursuant to M.G.L.c. 188. Alexan ra Best Preschlack STATE OF CONNECTICUT FQtrAcici ,ss. On this Aa day of September,2017 before me,the undersigned notary public, personally appeared Alexandra Best Preschlack,proved to me through satisfactory evidence of identification,which was her driver's license,to be the person whose name is signed on the preceding or attached document,and acknowledged to me that she signed voluntarily for its stated purpose and who swore or affirmed to me that the contents of the document are truthful and accurate to the best of her knowledge and belief. 3,gtatailit.0z9lata-/06-. Notary Public My commission expires: i. SAMANTHA J. FRATTAROU Notify P*Otk,Statt o1 Cena.cticd `"- My Coolislos 11041 00*31.Mt s+, *„.g ` Tri ,.;1ATApty:-.jf'-.1 •; i+, r ,. ,. fAhiC51 +?I,' / ------- Certificate No: OP-2014-0572 Building Permit No.: BP-2014-0153 Commonwealth of Massachusetts Town of Nantucket Building Electrical Mechanical Permits This is to Certify that the SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING located at Dwelling Type I 9 WOOD LILY ROAD in the Address TOWN OF NANTUCKET Town/City Name IS HEREBY GRANTED A PERMANENT CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY Two story 3 bedroom 4 bathroom dwelling with unfinished full CO for permit 317-14 M/P 67-807 cellar I This permit is granted in conformity with the Statutes and ordinances relating thereto. i I a I Issued On:Fri Nov 21,2014 O I � GeoTMS®2014 Des Launers Municipal Solutions.Inc. L_ 7 E-0 6-,�,Z t' ( 5 r Lrb 0 ort ;o O Z ,_; ►d ro y' 71 6 y y tri m r4 ,...i .ri w x r) 5 4 *it NI *, 6,__J 7.4. t 5 -, 4 :4 C CA CA n rD n _ ).,1t� O tri 6 O .� eD r TD 9 J Vn up ,ev. ,- o 82 < ...t. nb O t�° ''h C O aVh f a jt ,,--] y t.-4 d tilydzO H tt idt21 KSi` rOFd Hx � ti �'3 'd k d ro ar o111111111111 "66 rip 4 i t'; C� " � C'+ < ti N,--1 � O j =� � r • cey � *iii c. tri CA x Zi N © 00 vr:. © "4. Elmo v))-4 rimiF z WA E-+ W W M N g W@ a � p zCA a VI O l - c:,..:Z �' � W fz AU H11 06) oft Za, q z P-( 7 A �; I WEi W (..s„.. Ellm. ' i r p E. E“)a, .71 fgw a ¢�O ` p z 9 00 zE� EWcf 00 O dz H �,,,, W z a W "' V W -� Wce' H E"' � �4, O H � H UR w.4 z W0 wx U a , ce) ..• O� Oo E,..-,( a � d pi A� �' v� ��C c4 � CC C' ) gamil C W ,_(wE- H aW p. -d ¢ ►� , Eiado ,..., . - ...,4 — w g4 - d F, z E. .Pw , 0 E. w , C.? 7 p E-+ E. w ww z d Q -w P* a O At 4 Pat , ), E. z�aSa E. ap0 � _ o C C E-� Ca � v � � ZpE U U g: spl) I/1111* s ,¢ ®ir* Z 4E5 Ltx ..:1 ,,, , ,,44 xO 0 ° ,, z )...40 Axo w � a A 64 � �Z 8 .'-'t '• , wi:to 4E. x ;.=4 w Att p �+ b A wa;45 P4 .., U F4 C C4 �" WA ° az Q � n o `tlamil N HF ¢ Z � A P-1--1 A Elm* = ogo g A Hz4 � Q ;40� ;4 3 A � zHh � W o0 z cA 6-' 1 � Wd Up = - z H '.� w zH � w � a - `' C) va O Iv) . -, L; wz � o E, r E. � i ww � � � z WC47U � U � h `y1 fx� C '4 5E= u Or) a ,.a HSE"' ¢ W a SQ. ►(-4-� , I t . .41 7 V T. 7 § = :: % . I._4. ' I I Ii i --..i1, 4. ') i i1 - , :i[i i n ia . 0 ^ r-ici..... - .\ (\'\ ...),1\\ 1 1 ,',\ 1 W "vao Ck 4 4 ;.isL4 Z aU x I C r', AI — Ci W :GOx1x x z x a 1 'A a Q o - a z z z p 6 w w o )-,z o z z ,_ o z z,-. 0 o ^ f z w 4 a4 T.4 v a w a w w c.4 a w w ^ -- - U p o ` VD4 k4 tr) 44 T.-..4 H it : z w c c.7 d <C ;1' wz M cc W1.E A a A a a w N x Ot cr.▪ " j c 1-••'-' am � ¢ OuUl m ✓) h 2goa > r� � J -- 000 Z� o Iv Q1pZa.5 . � zG F Q m v » = m mf 0 o I ` o h o a a�Qa7 p � r z m O y `o ¢ `¢ mm0 moo o N 3 z o m Ow 0 0 _ Z O za a E_ Uo ° cNaell M N 03 d ooLL $ om M cLLovLLU /1 gy- aZZ ¢ > > O E ` o m _ ca _i z z u_ m i ` a O O ii: co H g LL 12. $m 0 a m L ] u �j I a' w ?'o `m E NI m y Q _ + y u, r- as _ a i % C W O a o N - m a w 0 r 3 E a IH (L,S v m p • .0 2 0 o v a n 1 E m ,gy 8 ,,t_,5 t', _z co z Io '�ij a , t q o - LL m m p w a = y 8 � -] t]] E LL� C = O oa 5 .L V7 a 3 m W O J U �71I ��.IO i- y 2 a LL 3 W m O « tY �� 4 W °' u 1- 0 Om J W u m O u m Y o Jy ao 3 n O ¢ oao, t� O 0.>- n M o a = O a a O F m 17 U. a \a a m m a •• a 0, crit O d Or o0i x-21 O - 21 O z° cn w Q a 4 N o z U WOz5 3 j F J co 0 z Q1... Z3m W °` ¢ j IL z m 0 Z i_ W = a Q" N F y y > g w QLLO LLD aO 0 ¢ O O y .T o = a w m f V a ho`om U o ] m p y , Y 2 W S > 1- mZ• Z Z a O d o m E m W w mm y w 0 y a0. C Do ' o o •- OO E E m o 'o ncC. a cm Q0W • m ` m m m n a m a w co f moro ` JWo ` Uz z t i ✓ J r mm - ai3oumt am _ t � `z ¢ ¢ ¢ om 2 \ O in z v 0 o O H ¢., O , 7 O O - Cm N a ® 0 0 0 0 0 ui ¢ NIB 00 0 0000 c) W kJ 0 0 '27 0 0 o Ng m z L Q� A - o4, a 0 pa Vl oo J o m o rJ o >,'F, ',2r .. cn E U ,.,1h w �vrti. 11J N m m Lo a _l1 aQ i'rn ' m ' CCI o o t m 31>0 m 5 m SRV) W 0 CO • nib N y am .76 - u_ WW LL T sn J in 2 -Ao a z W IT 0 ', Li,• m E W F y a _ O § U E -9J`m o` { ^ Z3 nzsog Wo dCC q o2 �' v h o � v 2ii O i 3 d 0 82 r a�M Zm S Z aT Lt 13 a n J " " • o ^ o O E _ yt 2 o z 0 a o J o y (- < LL O 0 E ✓ JIZ13Vy 3y MZ N N w d 3 j 9 m 4I 6 3 voas 3 . a, o ¢ z o , z a NE T. O O G F w 2 II 20 U aO Z l LLd (f) m ¢ O O z O u u a ¢ W 1 O o ro- 0 = ZU m Z mm nZ > U Q wa p y -ym W a c Q ¢ FwUg O 5 o o_ c Owh ¢ UU G _, o S ac a H z w w a W > o € a E mm N ` v ` m ocL •N 0. mNWW ¢ O ¢ > OJ o a 2 c0 cn U E. O Q a U h m 0. ` m a m D J c m o 0 , •;p3 cU O Ho __ __ • Li li O O CO V) V) L.' m I Z M C. m.Nc N , va ¢F o o .2-�,. o - U- 0 QQO¢y4 z I `✓' f- N¢m� mm (7 •N a !� Et wOmm � E. — E , = i 4 _Z m`m0 - m �� r " 0 o I m O 0 ❑ r O ° ° 9 3 E . c J m - o O W e d 71: ? a o, o . z �( E ! �. 'm v - E A 0 m .. o n = , U. - 3 a £ - m N up ` CI Z ' p a- ¢ a s 6 . 0- ops jC _ ▪ j • o p \ z . c oo z a , vcymz .c E Qk ` mU J s- v _ _ C H J U ZS v) 0 I ' m 7 c .ilI < 0 Z , O r c 3 W - w w - m a = 0 w p' o,'� d m _ "2, 0 3 d _° n u � � � O W p 1 � c 0 m V) 11 m z r m V v m . III!; oCO �fl- U go tn v h Lc -cc 5 Zs a_, a < m z z a '0 c r S d ola .. = a `--.1 = g 0 oQ m ti ? 9 a a a mdn OD Z 0 ` m m a c m a a V3u a O aI m a uLL0a � o7, 0 a ° 2 E m ,, 0 v = tc . o E z m 8 z ' 3maoDye o ` >1 -6§' c' m 0 a m , 3 3 m z OvwoacazOo.mam mN awo 00 , os .. J, ao a a c > a U - z - ZH 0 m o o0 - 0- p a C p, = m ca Zm m p : O m o . of ¢ s ' az E �sm lOT0z c = m 92 ,, 0m. ' - Z O c m m > E m m• C � ¢ , u VrPz30 .E _ = am , vOF - c O u o o m E o r m m Y Z w mr_ E c _ ac _ - '-. 3 ,--- = = c3 a72 N gNua0 mzs- a - - - _ W0oz Oa :os ; 3 _ _ = - 2 - q < a a 0 0 O m c 1o, `n _ 2 u � 79 10 v OC1w = 1 c I ~ _ - d d o�'-' s1J - o I U 1- F � J O s Q C m m 6 � O C.1 �' �v - L v) .i m W 'J M Q. 0 _w C� - -z t c n n a m LL 2 - vA 2 a is 0 - - ,_ CO N CO V) _ rn > n E o E c ¢ ¢ E o V7 _a E E E E m o Z c # i tr 3 , g m m g a 2 v v, 1- m 1 o v, - S 1 S aF.2 9 LL -I 2 E lt-..) Y i ' va ET., o tov3 OF a ' m - EEEE G m os 3 , mw amcmoWLL a a U tm HO 3 s s a i E z m• . - 0 ¢ U }}l!t1;LQ E D o N1 - Qq h h O1 p • O - a — '. �ICJv) n n h .. N N r.i II ° S� q\--- 6-. ± 6 w w v m .2 v 'J Om I Io md ¢ E N . m 0 a , ° , r Zo = A W v o E ,_o Uy t c c E C N 2 L ' o T F LL `y I wo V Qy w d o 8 n ' 2rc I m- o ` ,� 2' mE a C W LI 3 J �m cEo 0 o mm a Qt/z ` oo m 8 _ jELL 9 O oo H io < .-m ° T. m m mz m ° v'' 0 ! ° Uro ¢ mrn ¢ g € u 'a 'a LLo O-17 o ' 0 ° ° _ E ZC 0b mm oFDcc c u CIL 2 C -8 = . i 9 ZILL O . LL F- Q IW O cc am V V W LL 0 0 2 N Q F 0 I 0 j < IL N 0 ¢ Z I- J (7 Z iii ¢ Z 1 ,��apj11 UCkF�� Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals • eoRAy February 4, 2014 Stephen Butler �; S 5 101 Building Commissioner t` �' 2 Fairgrounds Road Nantucket, MA 02554 B\f"--__ Re: Lot 8; Type M-12 Rugged Scott 40B Architectural Drawings Dear Commissioner Butler: The above-referenced Application for a Building Peiuiits relates to a lot created as part of the Rugged Scott LLC 40B Project as granted by the Decision in Zoning Board of Appeals File No. 051-03, known as the "Comprehensive Penult for the Rugged Scott LLC Development". A copy of said Decision is on file with your department. Under 40B legislation, the Zoning Board of Appeals acts as the Nantucket Historic District Commission ("HDC") for the initial approval and the HDC staff has been charged with the final sign-off of the structure's compliance upon completion of the construction project and prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Any changes to the structure after that fall under the sole purview of the HDC unless the Zoning Board of Appeals finds that the changes are substantially different from what was approved. The proposed structure, applied for under said Decision, will be sited on Lot 8. The Building Type for Lot 8, situated at 9 Wood Lily Road, is classified as "Cedar M-12". In accordance with the Decision and my ability to sign off on the individual designs as the project progresses in my capacity as Zoning Board of Appeals Administrator, I have reviewed the plans attached with the building permit application and hereby find that they are consistent with those approved during final review at the meeting on Friday, February 24,2006. Respectfully, Eleanor Weller Antonietti Zoning Board of Appeals Administrator Town of Nantucket 2 Fairgrounds Road • Nantucket, MA 0255-i 508.2,8,7215 telephone • 508.228 7298 facsimile lif.225:12 EIDAL 1 Mig [s1.IFppl N0 LOT NBA COMISpW 51. 6.06 sr. ' LOT MONTAGE 20 R. A.1 R. i ' M 0 L Ms PLN BFPBEIDIn M APPROVED SIMDM9OV OF FR01T YARD SETEMEN ABL 5 rT./Io FT. 60 rt. ® LLr • v MN 17 TAR Ilq TAI,IAS k IA.3;AS MOM W •RCM TIDO SMACK S rt. 21.1 M. M1, rip .......s...""EMM S U OF ED ROAD ...M NIS,RAro 30641,1115 5T.N. IZE9.7(W2 Y) �� , O A ® ly - SSCCO TS WA20 N*"T°1� AT DATES•D M° •,IAYWY.eDMBYS M(A NfR.L,16 N. y.T,a.AT • ! SITE DESIGN JANUARY 2S,2001 NM RAISED MAW&21.N0& PINNED ST ORUNTS ENEMENTIO CO,RIG;APPROVED 'SBM EM SMACK ESTABIDED FRCS EASTERLY MG ENGINEERING, LLC, ARO DOOMED Br TOM OF NANTUCKET KAM M EMERY SME PNMERR PREFERS URI � o r, r '`— BOND 01 7/24/00 •TAMELY=ea can<Loam ON.))N SE. •M'• L RE MINER OF RECORD IS RUGGED SLOT,ILL c/o -YADMIY WPERY0J5 AMA.(YY.1-10{ITA C1p drill ��ie. Y TA " a • • M. 1 G15HYMw•;c1x^ RISK DDE DEVELUPYENI,32 NUMMI SRBEI YMYW 0 LSro SP.,YNbRMU 6 USS M I -L..- I• E�LESEARC1.RAA OZTME CIJIBROM,MASSACHUSETTS 02140. '�`�`7 ME STE IS ZONED LIMITED USE GENERAL 2 , • • L•E 1 7.`Ab%lJD)3 F SJB-9E'-7)c (WG-3)A5WINMSiTEDESH E1f_7JLF MOM ON ME 10AND COUNTY OF NANTUlT, MASSACHUSETTS;OFFICIAL ZONING ANP INTENSITY Y REQUIREMENTS ABOVE AS DICTATED TORN OF NANNOCET I i I ' ZONING Immo OF APPEALS FILE N0.051-03 DECISION. l 1 10 0 5 10 20 _ I t SCALE: 1 INCH= 10 FEET 4-' 3/ 1 I - 1 I �= W \ LOT 9__ � _ i LOT 7 _ — \X1; I I N I Z C2 •�N55_l'9"E _ _,0008'_•. — -I' - PLANFSEVIS•D E w- l.__ I a N74 41- DATE JANUARY 21,2014 '-'"E / m I N. .1 14420.38 DRAWN 9r 0051005 BY EC.3 r7 EXISTING COMMON -c.1_� JAG pI� P. of I ACCESSEASEMENT co I � _ PROJECT No. 6013 I. _r ..-..- -1 F ISSVEDFDR ___ .-_ --fl—_ N f" Ni L APPROVAL E z / \\\\\\\ Z L. J — w I 1 \ 20.7' I p l Ln w \\\\\\\\ i.e.-I-_ 117 ' N I w O i ! Ln I \ \m O N a I - , _N\\\\\\\ \ D I N =� 67-807 yvvvvvvvv F - - 0 1 F- --\\ LOT 8 \ W ) CS o I 6,049 S.F. \ Q I J —� 0.14 Acres J z lam' \ TOF=30.50 \ J 0LUHcwn I \ AREA=1,332 S.F. \ PROPOSED/ • w O = o O \ z- 0 I I \ \\\\\\\\3 \ -. . II� Ili J U a • .... „...._ ... , \—1 \ cn I \ \ EASEMENT u N I Z I�.\\\\\\\ W 0_ 0 _ 2,L_� 1 t -i - - W = Q W 10 5'� I . Gs .1 70.08' 555.17'09"W —.�� o UQ C Y <La - N../ � mL � tt ,-< / \�DMH7 D DMH 0 Q -----' D Z CC • S DRAYANG 1'.ILE WOOD LILY ROAD LOT 8 SITE LAYOUT PLAN 9 WOOD LILY ROAD \ SCA''-' 1"=10F SHEET N.S. 1 OF 1 PERMIT SS- '-` 1 `` • r„wT Q RESIDENTIAL //; �„ r�. TOWN of NANTUCKET COMMERCIAL .ti !',, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS �OTHER �-,~ 2/ SEWER APPLICATION AND PERMIT LSA :. FEE ' DATE PAID ISSUE DATE EXPIRATION DATE OWNER: i U: . PHONE: AGENT: - PHONE: • ADDRESS: ADDRESS: NO. TYPE OF WORK: LOCATION MAP# PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS OF THE 3 BEDROOMS PROPOSED WORK ARE AFFIXED KITCHEN SINKS CONTRACTOR: PARCEL# HERETO AS PART OF THIS RECORD. r LAVATORIES ADDRESS: ( PHONE: LAUNDRY TUBS CONDITIONS OF THIS PERMIT — URINALS BY ACCEPTANCE OF THIS PERMIT THE UNDERSIGNED AGREES TO ACCEPT AND ABIDE BY THE SEWER USE RULES AND WATER CLOSETS Yi REGULATIONS OF THE TOWN AND COUNTY OF NANTUCKET ADOPTED SEPTEMBER,1975,AND AS MAY BE SUBSEQUENTLY BATH TUBS E1 AMENDED.TO MAINTAIN SAID SEWER INSTALLATION AT NO EXPENSE TO THE TOWN OF NANTUCKET.TO GRANT AS MAY BE BBAOWERS i NECESSARY,ANY EASEMENTS ATTENDANT TO SAID SEWER INSTALLATION TO THE TOWN OF NANTUCKET AND ITS AGENTS. TO PROVIDE ANY BONDING BY CASH OR SURETY AS MAY BE DEEMED NECESSARY BY THE SUPERINTENDENT,DEPARTMENT DISPOSALS ' OF PUBLIC WORKS TO ENSURE SATISFACTORY COMPLETION OF THE WORK AUTHORIZED BY THIS PERMIT.TO PROVIDE DISHWASHERS AMPLE NOTIFICATION TO THE SUPERINTENDENT,DEPARTMENT OF PUBUC WORKS WHEN THE SEWER INSTALLATION IS/WILL BE READY FOR INSPECTION AND BEFORE ANY PORTION OF SAID WORK IS COVERED.TO HOLD HARMLESS AND CLOTHES WASHER INDEMNIFY THE TOWN OF NANTUCKET AGAINST ALL CLAIMS OF WHATEVER NATURE INCLUDING PROPERTY DAMAGE AND OTHER(SPECIFY) a BODILY INJURY RESULTING COMPREHENSIVE PUBLIC LIABILITY IN URANCE IN FORCEOM THE WORK CTO THESUPERINTENDENT,ED DEPARTMENT OFTHIS PERMIT. ALSO TO VPUBUC WORKS.IDE EVIDENCE - OF BOND APPROVED BY SUPERINTENDENT � SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT WITNESS cc WHITE:DPW FILE-YELLOW:DPW SEWER DM.-PINK:APPUCANT-GOLDENROD:PLUMBING INSPECTOR • A48 FOX GRAPE LANE /y5 FOX:RARE,_,ANF MAP 67 PARCEL 805 MAP 57 RARCE� 805 `C N 5577'09""E 50.08' n h • v 'EXISTING'- _• S H E L - �. - .-COMMON ACGESSf X l S 1!N G 1 .� l� . L. 38 E'ASEM�NT - _ (Pion No:2006-19) — - / //77,77.7 50.5 _ O t. i%///////'/1/ " DECK MAP 67 / - ;' PARCEL 807 i; W _- W 6,049th s.f '//////////X/ � --= // # / >. 3 EX/STING HOUSE % - - - 5 4' z �� 2 3 GROUND CODER= 1,332 s L / a i PATIO U // / $< _ //MPERWOOS AREA = 2,194 s!. / = - / j///////// n a 2' � � PORCH ' W - 54' �3 / Ifo! i j / 0, 9 F` - //////12 el,'" • �� m \ s I N 5577'09"E 70 GB" ` i APRON 1, , -'BRICK • SIDEWALK TO THE TOWN OF NANTUCKET WOOD L /L Y ROAD 7 CERTIFY THAT THE BUILDING AND IMPROVEMENTS SHOWN WERE LOCATED BY AN ACTUAL FIELD SURVEY AND THE DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE ACCURATE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF." NOTES: 1. OWNER: RUGGED SCOTT LLC 2. DEED REF: Bk:761 Pg:53 3. PLAN REF: Pion No: 2006-19(LOT 8) ( )- Pion No: 2006-61(LOT 8) ZvN w(� REQUIREMENTS 4. LOCUS DOES NOT FALL WTHIN A LOT AREA: 6,D<9 s. ` SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD ZONE AS FRONTAGE: 70 08' SHOWN ON FEMA FLOOD INSURANCE ;in/ RATE MAP No. 25019C–0089–G FRONT YARD: 5'(M11;; � doted 06/09/14. SIDE YARD: 5!M!n'i PROFESSIONAL LATGD�YOR REAR YARD: 5'; GROUND COVER: 1,5-5 s f. !1„<;,, A FINAL AS—BUILT PLANIMPERwous AREA: 2,a2o =.t. r1,�,,LJARA K E IN NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTSPLAN SCALE ENGINEERING, INC. Preparedbr 0 2 4 ' B 10 15 20 30 49 HERRING POND ROAD 19 01.0 SOUTH ROAD RUGGED SCOTT LLC l i i i i- 1 1 t i BUZZARDS BAY,MA 02532 NANTUCKET,MA 02554 1 inch = 10 feet #9 WOOD LILY ROAD (tel)508.833.0070 (tel)508.325.0044 MAP 67 PARCEL 807 °ateDrams cne d (lax)500.933.2282 www.brackeneng.com OCTOBER 27. 2014 I RNR,/_RC/DL H DFB/AMG [Certificate No: OP-2017-0520 BuildingPermit No.: BP- I -- — 2017-0568 1 Commonwealth of Massachusetts Town of Nantucket Building Electrical Mechanical Permits l This is to Certify that the ALTERATION located at Dwelling Type I I 9 WOOD LILY ROAD in the TOWN OF NANTUCKET Address Town/City Name IS HEREBY GRANTED A PERMANENT CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FINISH BASEMENT 767sf/includes Two Home Offices& T.V. Room I C.O. for Permit#1095-17 M/P 67/807 I This permit is granted in conformity with the Statutes and ordinances relating thereto. 1 I CL, L ---- I Issued On:Thu Nov 2,2017 GeoTMS®2017 Des Lauriers Municipal Solutions,Inc. L-- ----- -- - - X40 CAW— Sb I - - - - — :2 5:1' 2 '1 61 j •=i ,„ e 9 n C O , y ,..• HC „ 0 A y ay • y� tt tt lit = ).-3 ,� op; 4. 0 )7)' ;=1 j'' ,— ti m 0 ,,,s 4 cA timil r;I:D4 tt n C i 0 l-i p. o ?:' H C � 0 yCA y z z - N y h-i P:ili "'H C y trJ 5z. (- F. o Li s cr 5 , pi t-, i.- � CD ?j 'b ,� y d z eDM g 1 2i titt 4 - o i-1 . ** tnt- C7 )7:1 C rzitt m z c O U� O �-► O Y cA ,i Pci t-i r 00 0 Q 0 w U z 0o N a H w p o O ;=-: 7 '. wZ Q z z ~ q � �" VD IN � 4 wo w ►- a, W 10 oz AU z x � Er , c ..,t ;4E.: a Z a Hai a � EN. b g.. z 4 p ave w . o � O ,`n{ d Ey Q ri l°1 .• tj O 44 w E. 3. 4 O Ey Q U _Q I Co) ISI a x `E5 a z �=+ � -� vs wHOF t 4 d ►� E. w zrz wz [..� ►� w wax x � o ° 6 C 4 g bA H Hwz Hwa z Li E Z .1-1 06 �., Od QE, O 1. 0 �. 4 AC ° Hz�EC•~W OE - pa Hli,4iii l o : `/ ► O o c � - Z / . 4'4 mmil H 0wcz( zL' =O 0 Evg) C 55 Z A v W ~ w - r z W U w w aza MA 'AC � Q' Q ~ Q011•111! aWaA ° '_ q Az �=+ C/D C ►� E w Eq+ � n Z - 4 go � hUa Uz , x A a w � . 0Ell* ono w ►� w E. mac; x H x H H U U z 4 t U p o z f o zH � ^ I 5 H E_ ° , zE' ° . Cx � Hx o oHxwo A 0 „, 4 i � o c w E. 4xU E � w z O O E 44 dzz w ' � ��, c,��' U 44 ,,c,) C' z , 0 ;:� " r11 -,r - _y 5 r` r % <4 i ra OL se.1 1.-' A `� 0 1`P 4.• ii 0o , oW o 1P1 .t z Q x A C� , W z 1 —_- ° ° x c) !EdI x7 O u : = g ,4 ,-; CC7 U W d 4 4 4 4 41 w o z o 4 4 a w w o 4 w w a w h a w x w w */ � o w w E ( W r , (:/:, :. , : E H v) ' I ,c, w E. r,_ aW, '' E-1 iz F x z o o W'+ a z o w E." z PP a o ?.'"' :1 1 i ! u i 4 W W W.n A = A a a g w w x N AN E-( � c . CC LLrc a ! . ¢ O a a 1 w 2m Q : Z� za � j = z ao I a� v3 vcZN = _r � 2 CZ 2 ii aN n o Q F- \ o LL _ 3 ' If. I Zo w OopO o LI ,i1 _ -5c o 5mw 88 ' �tav Z Z C - � • O 0 iFts -C m-, ,f., o m ... . •E _ ,m .., ,„, IIcI , il > a \ Q « W d m e _ '- u_ 3a C _ � ' o G m CC aii a m Znh op° o N y° '\ t - ; E _ o \ " O -2 1 • a w s m3 > ar m �) , w a - cc II l O < s QO i mi _ f a c >m - O a` a Q U O O = ? ❑ ❑ z a • v m �❑ U 1- Q a % ro o Z U w Z Q z Z g O CC y I Z . 2 N y m r I F < `< O ¢ ' O W = U a w < 2 -_ Z L-. v -- 8 Nw . I Q O O Q U N o 1 = u _ - ¢ E E-' 0 o 0 LL O a F '" s n = 7 to 7 a'Q LL . y s u 2o o m a OZ O o Om E , - aGO U m y S r.W m m 0 O 2s8m WZo a ZHV > gaP- 0go a s s a o ' c = _ m - . OLL5 Z Q ¢ ¢ o f Oin o sO i OFn vy ` Oa 4- J000 N < 7 ❑ t�C❑ 7 ❑ u ¢ X❑7 7 7777 ri -L: 7 = 777 C -` 2 f z , S r x O o L r•Q ,r o y m I r--- nq f,, s j •f1 ff� , j jr 3 C' C .n L U 1 w 90 y U T= C' z N y Z V U u s s ' ro I may, , M .03 o 8 td T m ilJ a s Lai VA iii -1- .3am r' O ` O` _j to s a2 o amQ t m m 0) 0 N—1N acs s - , m , I-- E o€ H N E ---k ----.� :f vu O a c Z. kf o o, I J •e dy w < Ct. m 'J '� a 3 m C.j. W 4'4, co 9 S 0 .r 3 J H 0 � 3 _ m 6 •r. _ -v 3 r� -0,p M s — 8 v y7 F- , E J xO ` ¢ m cr O i 3 J oLL G co o E ....,,,1 •-••-• 0 N \ 11 � wL Q ai 17 ¢ O a r 9 G n v� 0 z V1 %4 2 C Wo ) - 6 13, vo rn0itsm 1 ¢ O O _,W ¢ y . R LL a '1 �L ;,_.•F r" o Q o < z Z Ww aUF0 c y Z Z '" U ¢LU co UW = Z v p ad E m LE g ¢ U W ¢ w H C m ¢ JI CO Q_ r o o t p a W o € v E ¢SU) t m m m' mLoWQO ¢ > O - J'O_ niO UO G N O O p Nii Z • • C a p C p.m. (26.. Z N f, 5 N '7, 0, ¢ v ."'m Z 0_ m I m WO m 5V--' � ¢ .. Io ~- > D c m $ m- U • mCmFN C I .N • 4 E o 3 E Z I m m o O w y a cn m • o z 1, E m1"712 N m m o m n- z Hi] !: c m a 2 Z ¢ O - oa o m g6 W ¢ .I m w o m Tei m ¢ `g m o m N -. L. N o « .3 « m Y ` V m Y m a .§ ® 3 0 E Z- ; a w 0 m s o « m 9 a o 1 I a o > Z a o o .z 3 is E a ❑ az 0311Z .37. c _� 2 1 ¢ 0: p F c W (g y o m I m ¢ Z N N m U 5 •O 9 0 �'F. Z o i c € 0 o 2' U n o o y op U U 0m 3 m ¢ z m a 1Wm z p co m m w « pm m � m ` oy m a . 1 Im Q A ¢ zavv .8'« a 5. y E- pOmUaj t ¢ I 1 o a o m mam 16 b, E w . E C m m -0 o o m c 3 W m E! p . a gr'c 0. w Em IO 0) B ° m w u- - m UV5. m 2 Z co > d d E 2 0 j °' ❑ ma p a3 3 my O - c F o Zx aZOca.ma2a c NgnoS 88 r g W Q mm mmp mE 2E '-'0 ',2,, T2 0 m5mo0Oo0- a . o , m d Z ° m 6 m U m v 6 p Zcg,m ,0 > m mm •c N ¢ W O m cC m Z 'nQ ot mE •m g a a 0->„,„ z o Im Z cm C E 2 DO (E « w m m m m « m m ONE2 Qa ; m ti D o mOm m >. - m z cNa 0 w3 m = ¢ n LL av 0 N 'a N U- 6 0 Z -a - 21 = - ❑ ❑ 2O a as a co a 4 N O 0 O A' « 2) m = w Z m m • O il g No r m UQ Q 5 daa ., V V 0 • Nm m m mi9n .9 x n a o. a y a r' r ? v a N N N N H� ¢ o EEEE a r E. z - 0 1 5 1 1 o -7- S a E Q w c O 0 o.0 a En 5 o -. o C i m o mc n mo _' .. G ,! Li -g, 6ccm m m m $ Y 0. o. o. la. co co co 0 ID ,m m L m rnn E E E E m '�+ / (6— •A 2 ; a o — 8 ° v. E E E E 60 a '1 m rte Q Ag c uo. 3 3 a a 0 c �/1 C 1 ° O d zm -a / E. 1 o. rnu. Ti 0 a tp Tm '2 = _ t 44.- ,... h T8. HaaZ coli IIo. (A m n 'vi m c Y 'g 1. m U E .'z',1 Y3 m M m ` p w p i H v om .Ti. H w H a vJ z a b d W n 5 W.L' m m E G d' •a m td O 1 o . V w t c h E c LL-1f.. j .Q C 5 m % aYCCl T . E" 2' U CC 0 ma 1,-cmUQcEopoU � LL Q ' p C QO tt m '$ m m D w - m d d •EEl 2 • fv c o m � u_ a a Z m w Y o o - U •c '. I Qc U c E o 0 E cLL cwv = "2 ,0 i6 m ¢ c - SB u n Z .. ooo i d 0 Wco 6 V W lL U d y Q fC co O ¢ ¢ O Y P/ E Z ti LL Z • 0 Bk: 01495 Pg: 131 huh ! III 11111 Bk: 1495 Pg: 131 Page: 1 of 3 Doc: DD 08/06/2015 12:07 PM DEED RUGGED SCOTT LLC, a Delaware limited liability company having its principal place of business in Wilmington, Delaware, for consideration paid in the amount of $1, 095, 000. 00, grant to BRIAN P. LENANE and SUSAN C. LENANE, as joint tenants with rights of survivorship, of 11418 Rockville Pike, Apt. 2505, North Bethesda, Maryland 20852, with QUITCLAIM COVENANTS, That certain parcel of land situated in Nantucket, Nantucket County, Massachusetts, now known and numbered as 9 Wood Lily Road, bounded and described as follows: SOUTHERLY by Lot 50 on plan hereinafter mentioned, seventy and 08/100 (70. 08) feet; SOUTHWESTERLY eighty-nine and 39/100 (89. 39) feet, and NORTHWESTERLY fifty and 08/100 (50. 08) feet, by Lot 7 on said plan; NORTHEASTERLY twelve and 71/100 (12 . 71) feet, and SOUTHEASTERLY twenty and 38/100 (20. 38) feet, by Lot 9 on said plan; and EASTERLY by Lot 10 on said plan, eighty and 58/100 (80. 58) feet . Said land is shown as Lot 8 on plan recorded with Nantucket Deeds as Plan No. 2006-61, and contains 6, 049 sq. ft. , according to said plan. The fee in the ways shown on said plan is expressly excluded from the within conveyance. Said land is conveyed subject to the following matters: (a) Agreement and Stipulation for Entry of Judgment with Grant of Comprehensive Permit recorded with Nantucket Deeds in Book 1010, Page 1, as amended and/or clarified of record, including deed restrictions to be imposed upcn the Premises in accordance therewith. Bk: 01495 Pg: 132 (b) Covenant dated February 24, 2006, recorded with Nantucket Deeds in Book 1010, Page 46, as affected by Form J Release dated October 13, 2006, recorded with Nantucket Deeds at Book 1044, Page 244. (c) Declaration of Trust of Rugged Scott Owners Association Trust dated February 24, 2006, recorded with Nantucket Deeds in Book 1010, Page 51, including but not limited to the right of the Owners Association Trust to impose maintenance fees and to promulgate and enforce rules and regulations. (d) Declaration of Restrictions and Easements dated I, February 24, 2006, recorded with Nantucket Deeds in Book 1010, Page 78, including but not limited to the restriction that no secondary dwelling shall be built upon a Building Lot, as affected by Amendment to Declaration of Restrictions and Easements dated July 31, 2007, recorded with Nantucket Deeds in Book 1095, Page 66. (e) Grant of Right of Enforcement of Restrictions dated February 24, 2006, recorded with Nantucket Deeds in Book 1010, Page 104 . (f) Facilities Maintenance and Endowment Agreement dated February 24, 2006, recorded with Nantucket Deeds in Book 1010, Page 108 . (g) Conservation and Management Permit dated January 17, 2006, recorded with Nantucket Deeds in Book 1037, Page 74 . (h) Regulatory Agreement dated February 24, 2006, recorded with Nantucket Deeds in Book 1044, Page 160, as affected by Amendment to Regulatory Agreement recorded with Nantucket Deeds in Book 1045, Page 271. (i) Easement to Nantucket Electric Company dated January 24, 2007, recorded with Nantucket Deeds in Book 1066, Page 157 . (j ) Easement to Verizon New England, Inc. , dated January 24, 2007, recorded with Nantucket Deeds in Book 1066, Page 164 . (k) Easement to Comcast of Massachusetts I, Inc. , dated March 8, 2007, recorded with Nantucket Deeds in Book 1070, Page 71. Real estate taxes assessed by the Town of Nantucket for the fiscal year 2016, commencing on July 1, 2015. For title, see deed recorded with Nantucket Deeds in Book 761, Page 53. Bk: 01495 Pg: 133 The Grantor hereby certifies that it has not elected to be treated as a corporation for federal tax purposes, and further certifies that the sale of Premises herein does not constitute a sale of substantially all of the assets of the Grantor in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The Grantor hereby certifies that no member, or a spouse, civil union partner, ex-spouse or ex-civil union partner of a member of Rugged Scott LLC, occupies or intends to occupy the land as a principal residence or is entitled to claim the benefit of an existing estate of homestead in the property by court order or otherwise. Executed and sealed on , 2015. // - Rugg-. Sc.t By: / '7Jos-~rosner, Manager COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS Nantucket, ss. 0( i– m On this day of , 2015, before me, -� the undersigns notary public, per pally appeared Joshua Posner g as Manager of Rugged Scott LLC proved to me through satisfactory v. enc of identification, which was =Z to be the person whose name is signed on he preceding or attached document, and acknowledged to j ' me that he signed voluntarily on behalf of Rugged Scott LLC for - its stated purpose. fQ- I,, /62,644_4__e___ , .., , R q at '-1 I 4 1 NANTt1C.K�Ei LAND BANK -- Notary P . i c 4 MASSACHUSETTS EXC TAX 00 CERTIFICATE & MARIANNE HANLEY 1 M Nantucket County RO /16 001 $ a` ROo , Nctsn Pubiic Date: 08/08/2015 :07 PM ) - COMB OPAmy;'El1Tr;c 1;,,;;cpg11 775' i Ctrl/481837 01 Doc/ 00002224 Exempt My Comms. n Expires I Fee: $4,993. Cons:$1,096,000.00 fib•'%,2016 ONon. Ie_______ —— — — • iio5r0t.. l I_s Awn«tramo, WM I