HomeMy WebLinkAbout22 SE48_3115 Kellner Letter regarding SBPF 02_08_19
February 8, 2019
Nantucket Conservation Commission
Andrew Bennett, Chair
c/o Jeff Carlson, jcarlson@nantucket-ma.gov
Nantucket Select Board
Jason Bridges, Chair
c/o Erika Mooney, Emooney@nantucket-ma.gov
RE: Sconset Beach Preservation Fund Expansion Proposal
Dear Members of the Conservation Commission and Members of the Select Board:
My family has owned property in Quidnet (39 Quidnet Road) since 1987 and we have been
renting in the Quidnet/Squam area since the 1970’s. Our property directly fronts on Seseschacha Pond
and we overlook the “Cut” which, although opened twice a year by the Town for environmental reasons
(which we strongly support), serves as a barrier beach between the Pond and the ocean.
To the extent that the Cut is potentially threatened by the SBPF Project, we are not thrilled at the idea
that our property may become “oceanfront”. In addition, I swim off Quidnet’s ocean beach almost daily
in the summer and we periodically walk the beach all the way to Sankaty Beach Club and beyond. As a
member of Nantucket’s Clean Team, I also walk the beach to the geotubes and beyond picking up trash.
Thus it is fair to say that I am intimately familiar with the oceanfront between Quidnet and Sconset, the
extent of the bluff erosion and, importantly, the impact of the existing geotube project on the beach.
We are writing to express our continuing concerns about the current proposal of the SBPF to
substantially expand the scope of its geotube project below the Sankaty Bluff in Siasconset. We remain
seriously concerned about the following issues:
1. The project adversely affects the public beach rights established long ago in trust for the
inhabitants of Nantucket. An expansion of the project would further compromise these public
rights that were deliberately created in recognition of the significant historical importance of the
Sconset Bluff and adjacent beach.
2. The project, even at its current (pre-existing) scale, has been shown in recent independent
analyses to have resulted in downdrift damage and significant erosion to areas to the north and
south. Last winter, the barrier to Sesachacha Pond was breached and the Polpis Road was
significantly damaged, cutting off access for six weeks or more. The Conservation Commission
should not approve a project that creates further risk of such damage to other neighborhoods.
3. The Town is working on a Coastal Resiliency Plan to set priorities on actions to be taken to
respond to climate change. Sconset and the area below the Sankaty Bluff are not a priority.
Management of erosion issues should be handled consistently and fairly throughout the Island
rather than by privileging certain property owners who wish to receive special treatment.
4. The proponents of the SBPF project have not been candid about their compliance with existing
permit requirements. Any action on claims for an extension of rights should not be permitted
while they have failed to satisfy their existing obligations.
Furthermore, we have grave concerns about the potential financial implications to the Town of
Nantucket and the taxpayers if the proposed project extension is allowed to go ahead. As far as I am
aware, SBPF has not demonstrated that it has the necessary financial resources to fund ongoing
mitigation in perpetuity. If SBPF fails to fund the ongoing project or its removal, the Town will be
forced to step in. (Costs to maintaining and repairing the public roads that carry thousands of
truckloads of sand to the bluff every winter are, of course, already paid for by the Town and the
taxpayers.)
To the best of my knowledge, I have not seen a fully documented budget including sources and uses
of funds for the project. It is inconceivable to me that the Town of Nantucket and its taxpayers
would permit a huge project without a detaile financial analysis and impact statement.
At a minimum, if the project is permitted, it should be a legal requirement that SBPF provide a bank
letter of credit to guarantee the fulfillment of its financial obligations as per a fully-verified budget.
Since the project, if approved, could conceivably be in place in perpetuity, it is difficult to imagine a
situation in which the Town of Nantucket and its taxpayers is not left holding the bag. It is essential
that this fact be disclosed to the Town and its voters and taxpayers prior to any approval of the
proposed project.
Sincerely,
PLK
Peter and Maria Kellner, 39 Quidnet Road