Loading...
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.