HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-09-17
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
Town and County Building
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
AGENDA FOR SEPTEMBER 17, 1987
A. PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Nantucket Wetlands Regulations Draft
2. Robert S. Yates - SE~8-~08 - Great Point Road
3. Cooper/DaSilva - SE~8-~16 - 53 Madaket Road
~. Harold E. Booker, Jr. - SE~8-~20 - 22 Folger Ave., Surfside
5. William Willet - SE~8-~22 - 6 Monomoy Creek Road
6. Robert Howell - SE~8-~23 - 23 Crow's Nest Way, Wauwinet
7. Patricia M. English - SE~8-~2~ - 158 Orange Street
8. Cranberry Construction Corp. SE~8-~25 - West Chester Street
9. Arthur I. Reade - 2~9 Polpis Road
10. Kate Mitchell - Lot 2, Valley View Drive
11. Town of Nantucket DPW - Madaket Ditch/No. Head Long Pond
12. Sherburne Associates - Boat Basin/Easton Street
13. Rhoda H. Weinman - 28~ Polpis Road
1~. William & Ruth Greider - 10 "F" Street, Madaket
15. John M. Eaton - 6 Squam Road
16. Alfred A. Lane - Lot 7~, West Chester Street
17 . Barry Lehman _. Sal t Marsh Road
18. Herbert Goldsmith - 2~ Grove Lane
19. Barth/Taddonio - 79 Eel Point Road
20. Dooley Family Trust - 7 Polliwog Pond Road
21. Dooley Family Trust - 11 Polliwog Pond Road
22. Dooley Family Trust - 13 Polliwog Pond Road
23. R. Griffin/M. Zodda - 3 Dionis Beach Road
B. PUBLIC MEETING
1. Minutes of September 3, 1987.
2. Orders of Conditions
a. Robert S. Elliott - SE~8-~12 - Lot 903, Elliott's Way, T.Nev
3. Enforcement Order
a. Nantucket Commons Trust / Brant Point Corp.
b. Michael Bloomberg - 115 Baxter Road - results of field insp.
~. Correspondence
5. Field Inspections
a. Crow's Nest Associates - 7 Crow's Nest Way, Wauwinet - N/I
b. Crow's Nest Associates 9 Crow's Nest Way, Wauwinet - N/I
c. Crow's Nest Associates - 109 Squam Road - N/I
d. Nancy Chiswick .- ~2 Meadowview Drive - Req/Det
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
Town and County Building
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Minutes of Wetlands Regulations
Page 1
NANTUCKET WETLA~~S REGULATIONS
OPENING OF PUBLIC HEll.RING FOR DR1\FT
MHWTES OF SEPTEIII[BER 17, 1987
The first public hearing for the draft Nantucket Wetlands Regulations
was called to order at 7:32 PM in the Selectmen's Hearing Room, Town and
County Building. Members present: Peter W. Dunwiddie - Chairman, Lee
Dunn, Lucy Leske, Bill Willet, Carl Borchert, Donald Visco and Henry
Wasierski. Members absent: none.
Public attendance:
approx. ~5.
A. PUBLIC HEARING
1. Nantucket Wetlands Regulations Draft. Lee Dunn moved to open the
public hearings. So voted. Opening statements were made by
Peter Dunwiddie who invited the public to present their thoughts
about the draft both verbally tonight as ,,1ell as to the
Commission in writing. He stressed that the purpose of this
first hearing was primarily to get reactions and solicit input
from the public, now that a proposed document in draft form was
available from which to work.
Lee Dunn read an introductory letter from John H. Roe, former
Executive Director of the Nantucket Land Council, who was unable
to attend this first session of the public hearings. The letter
outlined how the need for writing new wetlands regulations
came about, how the document is designed to provide guidlines and
performance standards for use by both the Commission and the
public alike, and discussed a couple of issues likely to be
controversial during the hearings, ie. scenic views and septic
systems regulation.
Henry Wasierski responded to some public comment requesting
rescheduling the public hearing by making a motion for one
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
Town and County Building
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Minutes of Wetlands Regulations
Page 2
specifically designed to discuss the draft and not be part of the
regular meeting. Many felt the room was not sufficiently large
to accommodate the turnout. Donald Visco agreed that there
should have been a separate hearing.
Carl Borchert felt the hearing should open tonight to start
things rolling and those who did not get adequate chance ~o speak
were encouraged to attend future hearings of the draft, which
were certain to continue. Lucy LesKe felt this first hearing
should at least accommodate those ~"ho had traveled from
off-island. There was no second to Henry's motion which was then
withdrawn.
Russell Lawton of Nantucket Cranberries opened public comment by
stating his concern that the new regulations were in several
places not specific enough. He wasn't sure what they would be
asking from his operation as compared with the past. He had
cooperated with DEQE for many years with no problems. Almost
every activity in his water-dependent operation is subject to
jurisdiction.
Mr. Lawton continued by describing several of 17 different points
1.11 the draft ~.Ji th which he had problems:
1. p. 5 - agricultural practices - use of pesticides, etc.
What's ~Tong with what's been done in the past?
2. p. 7 - bogs - if he considered any of the plant species
listed valuable, then many of his routine activities,
particularly restoring old bogs, would be in violation.
In his business. many of these species are considered
"weeds." He felt the definition was mif:.leading, unclear
and cause some concern about how often he would be
required to file for these routine activities.
3. wetlands scenic views - would the view from Bean Hill on
the Milestone Road be considered a wetland scenic view?
Many of his operation's necessary activities such as sand
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
Town and County Building
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Minutes of Wetlands Regulations
Page 3
moving could be considered violations. He felt the
definition was too loose and open to many
interpretations.
Mr. Lawton stated facetiously he was not about to hire a partner
just to work with the Con~ission to comply with the new
regulations. He wished he and other professionals had been
consulted during the formulation of the draft.
Peter Dunwiddie sensed Mr. Lawton's defensiveness and said it
would have been very difficult to put the draft together
initially with the input of 50 or more people. He asked him to
put his com~ents in ~Titing and reiterated that the Commission at
this time wants public contributions and professional input.
Mr. Lawton said he feared the public perception was that these
regulations could be passed as written. Carl Borchert made
reference to p. ~8 - #6 - which handles cranberry bog maintenance
in an identical way to how the state handles them. Carl also
outlined the 3 sections of the draft and how it was organized.
Robert Daylor, president of Daylor Consulting Group, was involved
in the redrafting of the state wetlands regulations and thus
expressed some appreciation for the hard work and local
cooperation with which the Commission would be faced.
Mr. Daylor commented on the 2 major parts of the draft:
1. general provisions - he termed this section, "How you
get into the game." The purpose of defining jurisdiction
is to add clarity to the law. For example. if the
Island were painted red and green, with lands under
jurisdiction in green and those not in red, filing would
be simple.
2. performance standards - should be as objective as
possible and are particularly difficult due to the nature
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
Town and County Building
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Minutes of Wetlands Regulations
Page ~
of scenic Vlews. They should also be as specific as
possible, giving acceptable heights, widths and other
figures within which to work when possible. Perhaps
wetlands scenic views should fall under some other source
of jurisdiction.
Mr. Daylor outlined the difficulty in defining wetlands values
and ho\~ to protect them. He felt it is important to regulate
activities both within and just adjacent to wetlands. It is
difficult to assess future wetlands damage by activities in
uplands or outside the Buffer Zone. Mr. Daylor agreed to send
his recommendations to the Commission in writing.
Robert Leichter inquired as to whether Town Counsel had had a
chance to review the Draft. Peter Dunwiddie said, yes, Paul
DeRensis was in the process of doing so.
Phil Bartlett of Bartlett's Ocean View Farm commented on the
portions of the regulations which deal with the "drinking water
quality" of irrigation ponds. He said it is unreasonable to
require that irrigation water meet such standards and cautioned
the writers of the draft to know what they \~ere talking about.
He said sometimes those persons who draw up regulations may have
good intentions, yet do not have real life experience with what
they are regulating. He added the agricultural producers have a
right to stay in business despite numerous regulations, however
people will still always have t.o eat. Peter DUn'i.Jiddie asked I"1r.
Bartlett t.o draw the Com.mission' s att.ention to any problem areas
and looked forward to receiving his input.
Iv1ichael Bachman, surveyor. suggested scheduling "lOrking meetings
with those professionals and parties who would be most affected
by the new regulations and receive specific testimony from them
then.
Lydie Rickard asked the COIThTlission to glve adequate public
notice of future hearings.
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
Town and County Building
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Minutes of Wetlands Regulations
Page 5
Karen Dreyton, a resident, gave a layperson's view of the draft.
She expressed great difficulty in understanding much of the
.terminology, said the lists of plant species were foreign to her
and for someone such as herself who does not have a biology
background it was hard to know just where wetlands were and how
the new regulations might affect her daily activities or future
projects. She said she was afraid to even mow her lawn now. She
was also confused about how the 100 yr. flood plain delineations
enter into this.
Ms. Dreyton stressed the dire need for public education about the
wetlands regulations and the function of the Conservation
Co~mission overall. She felt ordinary people should be able to
tell ~~here wetlands are and know when certain activities require
filing.
Peter Dunwiddie said t.he Co~mission has a brochure in the works
and will scon be hiring a full time Conservation Administrator
who will playa large role in public co~munication. Peter
explained the Commission was made up of all volunteers at the
moment who are all overloaded.
Lucy Leske added that even the Commission members at times have
difficulty interpretting the regulations and laws. Carl Borchert
said one of the least satisfying parts of being on the Com~ission
is seeing violations.
Attorney Richard Glidden wanted a map of the 100 yr. flood zones.
Carl Borchert said the maps were not new, were available to the
general public by calling the FEIVJA office in Boston (223-2609),
and a set would be brought to the next meeting.
David Moretti asked that the hearing be continued and stated
there were a l1'...1Jnber of points which do not have the support en
which they should be based. He felt the draft allowed the
Commission to m~:e determinations at its discretion.
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
Town and County Building
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Minutes of Wetlands Regulations
Page 6
1. p. 9 - Mr. Moretti was not sure all these interests were
specifically stated in the Bylaw. These were
presumptions which were created by the regulations and
he questioned the presumptions. He wanted to be
educated on what needs to be regulated.
Mr. Moretti went on to ask whether the Com~ission saw these
regulations as expanding on areas already protected by the state
regulations. How much more of the Island would now come under
the Com.mission' s jurisdiction? Peter Dunwiddie explained the
intent of the new regulations was to clarify, not to expand upon,
the Bylaw and areas protected.
Carl Borchert said the state Wetlands Protection Act allows the
Commission to have jurisdiction outside the 100 ft. buffer zone
when necessary.
Michael Bachman asked whether all of the 100 yr. flood zone would
be deemed unbuildable under these regulations. Peter Dunwiddie
made reference to the proposed variance procedure. Carl Borchert
said the system of 100 yr. flood zone designations refers to
regulation of septic systems and the zone is not regarded as a
resource area. Carl thought there would be very few cases of
conflict here. Lee Dunn added he thought many people were
confused about this point.
Michael Bachman again reque:;;.ted additional meetings for further
discussion with those parties affected. He went on to explain
that due to limitations in the FEMA budget, some of the inland
wetlands were never adequately mapped. He understood that the
state never intended to preclude septic systems from within the
100 yr. flood zone.
Laura Hussey said she would be upset if additional meetings were
held which excluded the general public. Lucy Leske suggested
having separate hearings to discuss particular portions of the
draft, all open to the public.
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
Town and County Building
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Minutes of Wetlands Regulations
Page 7
Lucy Leske gave her o~~ impressions of the draft. Her largest
problems were with the variance process which in her view was
unclear. Although it is not the intention of the regulations to
make lots unbuildable, Lucy felt the variance and appeals process
needed to be clarified.
Michael Bachman thought it is most aggravating to the public to
have to take something to court. He suggested an intermediate
step of occasionally reopening a hearing before the Commission
after a DEQE appeal to avoid going to court.
Gwen Guillard addressed her concern over asphalt runoff which she
stated was a real problem where she lives. She wanted to know if
the regulations dealt with asphalt runoff into wetlands.
Jeffrey Brooks cited a problem on
1. p. 1~ - wetlands scenic views - Mr. Brooks felt the
definition should be clarified because the terminology
was ambiguous. For instance, the "sense of solitude"
referred to depends on whose values are being addressed.
Peter Dunwiddie said the Corrmission welcomes anyone's definitions
on wetlands scenic views and tonight's meeting was not intended
to address whether they are a value to be protected.
An unidentified member of the audience asked how much of the
island fell within the 100 yr. flood zone. Carl Borchert said
generally it is anything below 8 ft. elevation.
Lucy Leske made the point that wetlands scenic views may only be
considered a protec.table interest in some resource areas. Nancy
Greene encouraged the use of Buildin2: With Nantucket in r.jind
which she thought offered excellent guidelines. Russell La~~on
asked whether this mirrored the state laws.
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
Town and County Building
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Minutes of Wetlands Regulations
Page 8
Jennifer Shakespeare, architect, wanted to know if the draft
addressed projects in the subdivision stage. Carl Borchert said
the Commission is in communication with the Planning Board via
Planning Board Referrals, however often the recommendation is not
adequately conveyed to o"mers as to the buildability of their
lots. Lucy Leske added that Requests for Determination are not
attached to deeds, either.
Town Clerk Joanne Holdgate elaborated on the magnitude of the
draft and felt strongly that on that measure alone the draft
should receive a lot more consideration by the public. She cited
the need for greater public education, more chance for public
com~ent and additional hearings in a much larger room. Other
than a Public Notice in an August issue of the Inquirer & Mirror,
she had not noticed any other publicity or request for input.
Ms. Holdgate felt the common resident usually has no contact with
these regulations until they start a project, and that generally
speaking the public does not keep abreast of wetlands issues or
other regulations. She urged the Commissioners to t.ake their
time in revising the draft and to not hurry it along.
Lydie Rickard feared the Commission Hould vote on the new
regulations at the next meeting.
Melissa Philbrick of Vaughan and Dale cited the lack of public
education as having been a problem when revising the state
regulations, too. With reference to the appeal procedure, she
cited the need for a precise time period to better deal with
a~biguous issues. With regards to variances, she felt impact to
wetlands should be mitigated, although some subjectivity and
degree of balance will always be involved. She felt the
relationship between applicants must be improved and added one
reason for public fears that the draft might be railroaded
through may be the proposed Sept. 1. 1987 effective date.
Fred Lane asked the Corrmlission to consider continuing the hearing
to later meetings.
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
Town and County Building
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Minutes of Wetlands Regulations
Page 9
Lynn Zimmerman of the Nantucket Land Council spoke of the amount
of consciousness-raising going on within the community due to the
draft and the increased interest being stirred up about the
Commission and environmental issues. She felt the current
anxiety would be alleviated by the presentation of clear
guidelines, procedures and performance standards which would
serve to smooth out the filing process both for applicants and
Commission alike. She added that the drafting of ne,.; regulations
was timely in light of increased development pressures and other
demands the Commission is facing.
There being no further corrments at this time, Lucy Leske moved to
continue the hearing until October 1, 1987. Peter Dunwiddie
announced the hearing would be well advertised and a larger room
would be used for the hearing. So voted.
The hearing was continued at 9:05 PM.
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
Town and County Building
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Minutes of September 17, 1987
Page 1
MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 17, 1987
The public hearings of September 17, 1987 were called to order at 7:32
PM. Members present: Peter W. Dunwiddie - Chairman, Lee Dunn, Lucy
Leske, Bill Willet, Carl Borchert, Donald Visco and Henry Wasierski.
Members absent: none.
A. PUBLIC HEARINGS
1.
Nantucket Wetlands Regulations Draft.
hearing appear as a separate document.
- 9:05 PM.
Minutes of the public
Hearing duration: 7:32
*** Short Break 9:05 - 9:15 PN ***
2. Robert S. Yates - SE~8-~08 - Great Point Road. Les Smith of
Daylor Consulting Group was present as agent for the applicant
and submitted a report containing the additional information
requested by the Commission on April 30, 1987. The report
addressed the hydrogeology of the site, the potential for
pollution impacts associated with the subsurface sanitary
system, the source of potable water and the type of foundation
to be used for the proposed dwelling.
Mr . Smith summarized the sumrner I s detailed groundwater study.
Groundwater monitoring occurred in two timeframes: 1) measuring
the water levels in each well every half hour over a tidal cycle
and 2) measuring water levels in each well once per day for a
monthly cycle. The results of the study are presented in
Appendix "A" of the report.
Mr. Smith went on to describe the groundwater velocity and
conductivity evaluations. Travel times were calculated to be
80.39 days as the fastest time and 566.25 days as the slowest
time as heading towards the harbor. He felt these travel times
combined with the microbiological decomposition that occurs in
the sediment column beneath the leaching field will be
sufficient to prevent pollution to the harbor.
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
Town and County Building
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Minutes of September 17, 1987
Page 2
Mr. Smith stated the Wauwinet Water Company claims there is
an excellent supply of water to the site and the existing
sources could supply at least twice the existing needs.
Alternatively, Mr. Yates is presently looking into
desalinization units to provide sufficient potable water to the
proposed residence.
With regards to the house foundation, both architectural and
pile foundation schematics were presented. The house would be
located in a FEIII[A Zone AO which indicates 1 foot of flooding
over this portion of the site for a 100 year storm event. The
lowest floor would be located above this. I>1r . Smith felt
natural dune migration could occur with the pile foundation
design. The foundation is designed to withstand a ~ foot
breaking wave and 100 mph windforce. Tiedown straps and
kneehraces would be installed to withstand windlifting activity
and increase stability.
Carl Borchert wanted to know how the ridge line compared with
the 2 adjacent houses. Mr. Smith agreed to supply that
information. Lee Dunn was concerned with points brought out by
the Wauwinet Residents' Association - dune scour problems,
potential breakthrough. He said most of the houses out there
and the vegetation around them require constant maintenance. He
was concerned about the driveway creating a conduit for the
"rind. Mr. Smith felt that reduction in dune height and
breeching was largely due to mismanagement and made reference to
historic hauling of codfish boats having weakened the dunes to
the point of breeching in 1903.
Arthur Reade of Reade and Alger spoke representing opponents to
the project stating he/they had not had a chance to view the new
submission and would like an opportunity to respond. He felt at
least 2 weeks were necessary to formulate an intelligent
response.
There was SOMe discussion about whether the Governor's Executive
Order No. 181 actually does or does not apply in this case.
Mr. Smith explained the aInbiguity lies in the fact that DEQE had
mapped only a portion of potentially applicable coastal areas In
the state and technically only those actually mapped are
affected by the Order.
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
Town and County Building
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
I'-1inutes of September 17, 1987
Page 3
Bill Willet moved to continue the hearing until October 1, 1987
for a response from Wau\~inet residents and other opponents. So
voted.
3. Cooper/DaSilva - SE~8-~16 - 53 Madaket Road. John Shugrue \.J'as
present as agent for the applicants. Peter Dunwiddie read notes
from a telephone conversation with Lealdon Langley at DEQE on
9/11/87. Mr. Langley essentially reiterated points in a 8/25/87
letter of technical assistance t.o the Commission. The
application must comply with M.G.L.C. 252 as outlined in the
letter. Activities should not exceed what is necessary to abate
the nuisance. If the mosquito control project is not docL~ented
in writing, then it is not exempt from the Wetland Protection
Act. The major issues of concern are groundwater exchange and
how the activities affect the Bordering Vegetated Wetland.
Peter added that according to Town Counsel., the question of
jurisdiction still is unclear, however, the discussion with Mr.
Langley basically put things back in the Commission's lap.
Elisabeth Goodrnan, assistant to Town Counsel, thought the
Commission now had sufficient information to issue an Order of
Conditions.
Lucy Leske moved to close the hearing.
So voted.
~. Harold E. Booker, Jr. - SE~8-~20 - 22 Folger Ave., Surfside.
Robert Emack of Nantucket SurveycJrs was present as agent for the
applicant and set separation to groundwater at a foot higher -
7.25 feet elevation.
~ll. Emack requested a continuance of the hearing to finish
designing the septic system. Carl Borchert moved to continue
the hearing. So voted.
5. William Willet - SE~8-~22 - 6 Monomoy Creek Road. Mr. TI!I7illet
was present with Glen Wills from Nantucket Surveyors. A letter
from Lynn Zirnrnerman and George C. Thomas, abutters to the north,
was read which urged the Com~ission not to approve the project.
They were concerned with virus and nitrate contamination to the
groundwater and marsh system.
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
Town and County Building
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Minutes of September 17, 1987
Page ~
Lee Dunn wanted to know how close flood water would actually get
to the house site. Mr. Wills said the dwelling would be
situated 50 feet from the edge of the wetland and at no time
would the project be subject to a 100 - year flood event. The
house has a 15 X 35 foot footprint.
Mr. Wills said the septic system was partially mounted and
reminded the Commission that DEQE's main concern with septic
systems is their construction impact, and invited them to look
into this themselves.
Arthur Reade of Reade and Alger represented abutter Robert
Landreth who is concerned with violation of wetlands scenic
views. Mr. Landreth feels his enjoyment of the marsh view Hill
be impeded by this dwelling and joins \~ith Ms. Zirr~erman and Mr.
Thomas in opposing the project.
Carl Borchert moved to close the hearing.
So voted.
6. Robert Howell - SE~8-~23 - 23 Crow's Nest Way, Wauwinet.
Borchert moved to close the hearing. So voted.
Carl
7. Patricia M. English - SE~8-~2~ - 158 Orange Street. Glen Wills
of Nantucket Surveyors was present as agent for the applicant.
Henry Wasierski moved to close the hearing. So voted.
8. Cranberry Construction Corp. - SE~8-~25 - West Chester Street.
David Haines of Haines Hydrogeologic Consulting was present as
agent. Mr. Haines showed the exact location of the utilities
and referenced note #10 on the plan. A 2 1/2 inch PVC forced
main is to be used. All excavated matter is to go towards the
,jriveway.
Lee Dunn asked why one road couldn't service both dwellings,
going through one yard to reach the other. Mr. Haines explained
this would involve an easement and would go through Bordering
Vegetated Wetland.
Lucy Leske moved to close the hearing.
So voted.
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
Town and County Building
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Minutes of September 17, 1987
Page 5
9 .
Arthur I. Reade - 249 Polpis Road.
the hearing for a DEQE file number.
Lee Dunn moved to continue
So voted.
10. Kate Mitchell - Lot 2, Valley View Drive. Jeffrey Blackwell of
Hart - Blac}~ell Assoc. was present as agent for the applicant
and presented a revised septic plan. A letter from the
Schwenks, abutters, was read.
Donald Visco mentioned that the septic systems in this area are
temporary and 'i>lill hook up enventually to the Town system.
Peter Dunwiddie added, however, that there will be no way of
enforcing the conversion.
Mr. Blackwell said no groundwater was encountered in the tests
and the revised plan places the septic 2 feet higher, now at 6
feet. He agreed to recalculate the effective height and note
such on the new plan.
Lee Dunn moved to continue the hearing for revised calculations
and a DEQE file number. So voted.
11. Town of Nantucket DPW - Madaket Ditch / No. Head of Long Pond.
Greg Bakos and Jeffrey Bridges of Vanasse Hangen Brustlin were
present as agents for the applicant and described in detail the
project to replace deteriorated culverts in two locations on
Madaket Road.
The positive and negative impacts to the wetlands
were discussed. Since migrating herring may have been
restricted by the deteriorating 60 foot pipe, the primary
benefit of the project is seen to be the enhancement of the
channel for fi:::heries. The entire project has a tight. timefralTle
and must be completed by March 15. The total impacted area is
approx. 200 sq. ft.
The shape and design of the new culverts were discussed. The
bottom of the trapezoidal-shaped culverts will never be dry aDd
will consist of natural sediments. The difference in tidal
range is a maxim~~ of 0.6 feet.
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
Town and County Building
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Minutes of September 17, 1987
Page 6
Mr. Bridges listed the many permits and licenses that had been
obtained for the project, including those from the Army Corps of
Engineers and the Mass. Division of Fisheries and Wildlife. Lee
Dunn and Peter Dunwiddie asked Mr. Bakos to look into cleaning
out some of the cattails which have choked Madaket Ditch. Mr.
Bakos explained they were on a tight schedule, but would
consider incorporating it into the project.
Peter Dunwiddie wanted to speak with long-term residents in the
area because he was concerned with changes in salinity and water
flow. Henry Wasierski moved to continue the hearing until
September 2~, 1987 for a DEQE file number and more information.
So voted.
12. Sherburne Associates - Boat Basin/Easton Street. Bill Willet
moved to continue the hearing for a DEQE file number. So
voted.
13. Rhoda H. Weinman - 28~ Polpis Road. Bill Willet moved to
continue the hearing for a DEQE file number. So voted.
1~. William & Ruth Greider - 10 "F" Street, Hadaket. Glen vJills of
Nantucket Surveyors was present as agent with the Greiders who
wish to replace 2 existing structures ,-lith a new stTucture which
would be usable year-round. There will be no increase in the
number of bedrooms.
There was extensive discussion about the alternative of building
further back on the lot, a,'Tay from the marsh. The Commis s ion
was concerned with the construction impact and wished to
minimize destrucTion or the saltmarsh vegetation. The Greiders
explained they had looked forward to moving out to Madaket
year-round for a long time and were counting on the views from
the existing location.
Peter Dunwiddie asked the Greiders to consider the alternative
of placing the garage and driveway on a different side. They
explained this would disrupt years of buildup of scallop shells
in the driveway and ruin their garden. Mr. Wills said the
project was a valid application since this is an existing
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
Town and County Building
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Minutes of September 17, 1987
Page 7
foundation and felt building up from it would have less impact
than moving the dwellings.
Lucy Leske moved to continue the hearing for a DEQE file number.
So voted.
15. John M. Eaton - 6 Squam Road. Bill Willet moved to continue the
hearing for a DEQE file number. So voted.
16. Alfred A. Lane - Lot 7~, West Chester Street. Bill Willet moved
to continue the hearing for a DEQE file number. So voted.
17. Barry Lehman - Salt Marsh Road. Bill Willet moved to continue
the hearing for a DEQE file number. So voted.
18. Herbert Goldsmith - 2~ Grove Lane. Bill Willet moved to
continue the hearing for a DEQE file number. So voted.
19. Barth/Taddonio - 79 Eel Point Road. Ellen Harde was present as
an abutter who wanted to know why the project was before the
Commission. Carl Borchert explained that the activity was
situated 75 feet from a neighboring wetland. Carl moved to
continue the hearing for a DEQE file nlli~ber. So voted.
20. Dooley Family Trust - 7 Polliwog Pond Road. Bill Willet moved
to continue the hearing for a DEQE file number. So voted.
21. Dooley Family Trust - 11 Polliwog Pond Road. Bill Willet moved
to continue the hearing for a DEQE file number. So voted.
22. Dooley Family Trust - 13 Polliwog Pond Road. Bill Willet moved
to continue the hearing for a DEOE file number. So voted.
23. R. Griffin/M. Zodda - 3 Dionis Beach Road. Bill Willet moved
to continue the hearing for a DEOE file number. So voted.
B. PUBLIC MEETING
1. Minutes of September 3, 1987. Lucy Leske moved to wait until
the next meeting to accept the minutes. So voted.
"--.,
'.
1
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
Town and County Building
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Minutes of September 17, 1987
Page 8
2. Orders of Conditions
a. Robert S. Elliott - SE~8-~12 - Lot 903, Elliott's Way, Tom
Nevers. Lucy moved to approve the most recent plans submitted
and issue a standard Order of Conditions to include the
following Special Conditions:
1. The Order of Conditions and the Certificate of
Compliance for any new building within 100 feet landward
of the top of a coastal bank permitted by the issuing
authority under this Act shall contain the specific
condition:
Section 30(3) of the Wetlands Regulations,
promulgated under G.L. c. 131, s. ~O, requires that no
coastal engineering structure, such as a bulkhead,
revetment, or seawall, shall be permitted on an eroding
bank at any time in the future to protect the project
allowed by this Order of Conditions.
2. No activity shall occur beyond the snowfencing except
for installation of the wells.
3. Three to four rows of haybales are to be placed between
the well and the bluff.
~. All disturbed areas shall be revegetated with natural
vegetation only.
So voted.
3. Enforcement Order
a. Nantucket Commons Trust / Brant Point Corp. An Enforcement
Order issued on September 11, 1987 by the Commission was
discussed. There was some question as to whether the Order was
valid, since Peter Dunwiddie had subsequently found out from
DEQE that the applicant had filed new plans with DEQE which had
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
Town and County Building
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Minutes of September 17, 1987
Page 9
not been filed with the Commission. A 9/17/87 letter from
Robert H. Sarvis was read which included ~ letters of credit in
the amount of $12,500 each. The majority of the Commission felt
violations had occurred.
DEQE suggests in its recommended procedures that in a situation
requiring immediate action, an Enforcement Order may be signed
by a single member (in this case, Peter Dunwiddie) or agent of
the Commission if the Order is ratified by a majority of the
members at the next scheduled meeting of the Commission. Donald
Visco wanted to know how the Order could be ratified if it was
not clear whether it was valid.
Lucy Leske moved to ratify the Enforcement Order.
opposed. So voted.
Donald Visco
b. Michael Bloomberg - 115 Baxter Road - results of field
inspection. Henry Wasierski agreed to check the site for
compliance with a letter from the Commission dated August 2~,
1987 requiring restorative measures on the property.
~. Correspondence
All correspondence was read and accepted.
Prior to adjourning, Peter Dun,~iddie urged better attendence from the
other members for field inspections. Peter also announced that
Conservation Commission meetings would nO"l be televised on Channel 3.
Robert Laundry, who was present running the equipment, said the meetings
will be aired on Tuesday nights at 7:30 PM after each meeting. There
being no other business. the meeting adjourned at 11:~5 PM.