HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986-08-28
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
Town and County Building
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Agenda August 28, 1986
A. Public Hearings
1. Nantucket Commons Trust - SE48-365
2. Madaket Realty Trust - SE48-363 - Oakland Street
3. Thomas Barrows - SE48-367 - Cambridge and Tennessee Ave.
4. Granger Frost - 80 Madaket Road
5. John Kessler - 19 Wanoma Way
6. L. Dennis Shapiro - SE48-364 - Tristrams Ave.
7. Ralph T. Seward - SE48-366 - Eel Point Road
8. Martha Wells - Low Beach Road (Lot 28)
9. Martha Wells - Low Beach Road (Lot 36)
B. Regular Meeting
1. Minutes of July 31, 1986 and August 14, 1986
2. Request for Determination
a. Pocomo Citizens
b. Tim Lewis - Hummock Pond Road
3. Orders of Conditions
a. Stephen McMaster - SE48-362 - 26 Western Ave.
b. Madaket Realty Trust - SE48-363 - Oakland Street
c. Thomas Barrows - SE48-367 - Cambridge and Tennessee Ave.
d. Ralph T. Seward - SE48-366 - Eel Point Road
e. L. Dennis Shapiro - SE48-364 - Tristrams Ave.
4. Certificate of Compliance
a. Stuart Steele - SE48-273 - 47 Hulbert Ave.
b. Joseph Tellier - SE48-307 - 106 Orange Street
5. Other Business
a. Agricultural Restriction Act - Frank and James Powers
6. Field Inspections
a. Design Associates - Baxter Road, Siasconset
b. Design Associates - 3 Tristrams Ave.
c. John Shugrue - Bosworth Road
d. Milton Rowland - Off Bassett Rd. Quaise
e. Stuart Steele - 47 Hulbert Ave.
f. Joseph Tellier - 106 Orange Street
7. Correspondence
a. Mrs. W.R. Siddall - Pocomo Marsh
b. Nancy M. Green - Nantucket Commons
c. Quidnet Squam Association - Sesachacha Pond
d. Dr. John M. Martin - Lot 28 Low Beach Rd.
e. David Haines - Kaye - SE48-305
f. Brant Point Assoc - Jetties Shac
g. MACC Newsletter
h. MCZM - Conference
i. MCZM - Calendar
j. Mass. Campaign to Clean Haz.Wast
k. John Shea - Det. of App. Draft
POCOllO Citizens
Minutes of August 28, 1986
The public hearings of the Nantucket Conservation Commission
were called to order at 7:30 p.m. Members present were:
C. Borchert, L. Dunn, P. Dunwiddie, L. Leske, D. \"'isco, M. J"
Williams, W. Willet
A. f!,JJ;!)j_c.'_,.J~_?';;jxj!..'_(:1_~';,,:;..
1. Nantucket Commons Trust - SE48-3G5 - The Chairman reviewed the
laws under which the hearing is run, the interests they protect,
and the procedures on how the hearing will be held. He asked if
anyone felt that this was not a legal hearing for any reason.
There being no objection the hearing was called to order.
Carl Borchert made a motion to begin the hearing with the topic
of buffer zones. Mr. Philip Notopoulas, attorney for the
applicant requested that the hearing not be limited to only one
topic as the commission asked a number of questions at at its
last meeting which the applicant's agents are prepared to
answer tonight. L. Leske seconded the motion to begin the
discussion of buffer zones. All were in favor. So voted.
Mr. Notopoulas introduced Mr. Fredric King and Mr. Gerald
Buzanoski of Schofield Brothers, and Mr. James Hall and Michael
Marcus of IEP, who will be presenting information requested by
the commission. Mr. Notopoulas asked that the hearing be
continued for another two weeks as no definitive plans are
re::':ldy' ::':lS yet.
Mr. Notopola stated that it l~ the intention of the applicant
to provide a minimum buffer zone between the buildings and t~e
wetlands of not less than 15 feet and more in some places.
The buffer zone will be in most cases grass with embankment and
in others grass with concrete or brick pavers.
Mr. James Hall reviewed the desing
designed to allow small amounts of
grass areas of the parking lot and
pollutants entering the wetlands.
of the p::'j''-'er'::;.
Th(-?si:2 .::Ir. ('2
gas and oil to penetrate
eliminating the chance of
Mr. Michael Marcus walked the site and felt that the area is a
series of isolated wetlands. Most are shrub swamp with sandy
soils. The wetlands areas support a variety of wildlife where
the upland portion of the site does not seem to support as
much. Mr. Marcus feels that there is a good natural buffer,
and recommends a minimum 10 ft. buffer to the developer to
protect the wildlife interests. A siltation fence along the
edge of construction should be used to reduce disturbance in
the wetlands. Mr. Marcus reminded the commission that the town
by-law only protects wildlife in the wetland and not the buffer
zone.
Mr. Borchert asked Mr. marcus to respond in writing to the use
of a 50 ft. setback by the Town of Lexington By-Laws.
'1
...
Mr. Notopoulos stated that the Bear Street sewer connection
will not be used by the applicant on the suggestion of IEP.
The wetland will be the best filtration and there is no direct
connection from the wetlands to the Creeks and salt marsh.
There is no direct connection under the railroad bed if Bear
Street connection is used.
Mr. James Hall found a channel from the catch basin on Bear
Street to the salt marsh. To avoid introducing any new
pollutant, applicant will be allowing spill already going into
the wetland from off site to continue. The ground water does
flow in the direction of the Creeks. The applicant proposes
the pavers and oil separators to prevent a significant increase
in gas or oil in the groundwater. Mr. Dunn asked how the
pavers work when the ground is frozen. Mr. Hall stated that
the grass will function as an absorber only when the ground is
not frozen. Mr. Dunwiddie requested Mr. Hall to provide the
commission with calculations on how much spill a parking lot of
this size is likely to see and data on how successful the paver
system has been in absorbing oil and gas"
Mr. Notopoulos addressed the issue of replicatIon stating that
the applicant plans to replicate even though the state does not
require replication for an isolated wetland subject to
flooding.
Mr. Borchert noted that the state do~s require replication or
the amount to maintain flood capacity.
Ms. Leske asked for the trash maintenance information. Mr.
Notopoulos stated that a trash maintenance schedule would be
submitted at the next meeting. Leske also asked for the cross
section of the soils in the downstream end of the wetlands.
Mr. Marcus addressd this question by stating that all shrub
swamp land is underlain by sand. The perched wetland is
underlain by clay, and on top of that is a layer of peat.
Ms. Leske asked the agents about the hydrologic study to be
done. Mr. Hall stated that by rough observation the water is
flowing downstream to the Creeks.
Mr. Borchert stated that the commission is not asking for a
full hydrologic study but only requested one from the vegetated
wetland closest to the marsh on Orange street. The commission
just wants to know flow rates, and where water goes into the
marsh. Mr. Notopoulos stated the engineers are assuming that
the water is flowing into the marsh and not disputing this, and
therefore don't see the need for a hydrologic study when we
have shown desings for stopping any pollutants from getting
into the wetlands and have not increased the water flow.
Mr. Borchert asked what if the ground is frozen and the oil
separators don't work, oil spills into the wetlands. At what
rate is it carried and where does it go. Michael Marcus stated
3
that if the pavers are frozen and the searators aren't working
the therd line of defense would be the wetlands themselves as a
filter. Mr. Hall stated that a small amount of oil and grease
does not necessarily harm the wetland as these do not build up
but continue to be altered..
Mr. Stephen butler of the Nantucket Planning Board recommended
that the commission request an alternative plan other than the
grass pavers as the Planning Board does not allow this type of
parking lot in its rules and regulations and therefore might
not be permitted by that board.
Mr. John Roe of the Nantucket Land Councll asked Mr. Hall to
provide information on how fast the oil breaks down in the
grass system. Mr. Hall did not have the figures but will get
them; oil that gets on leaves and stems evaporates in a matter
of days. The oil which is absored in soils stays put until it
is broken down. Once it gets below the organic layer it gets
in the ground water. Mr. Roe asked if this amount of oil
affects the diversity of plants and animals in the wetland.
Mr. Marcus replied that no studies have been done that show a
long term change. Mr. Roe suggested that by reducing the scope
of the project, a larger buffer zone would act as a filter
instead of other mechanical means. What would be the
difference when a 50 ft. buffer was used, ln comparison to
uSlng the grass pavers?
Henry COll1n asked whether you can separate the oil that runs
off from streets from the oil from the project.
Margaret Berkhard objected on environmental grounds. She and
others are petitioning signatures to mandate the commission to
require larger (100 ft.) buffer zones..
Malcolm Soverino asked whether property owners upland from the
wetland have the responsibility of changing the direction of
their runoff away from the catch basins and then into the
wetlands. He is also concerned with activity in Madaket.
Runofff from roads into wetlands is happening allover the
island but doesn't seem to adversely affect them. This project
can control the runoff that goes into the wetlands and the
applicant sees the need to do this.
John McCormick was present as attorney for Marine Home Center
and Sherburne Associates. Engineers for his clients have just
been retained. Concerns will be voiced at the next hearing
when there are revised plans. He raised concerns with the
logic of using the wetland as a third line of defense. This is
the very thing the commission is supposed to protect. He also
noted that the location and height of the building foundations
have not been presented. He requested a map locating the
flood plain, and a need for a hydrologic study to show what is
going into the harbor.
o. Austin is concerned with the amount of opposition to this
4
project. Why didn't this go to Town Meeting? The commission
reminded her that this area is zoned commercial and if the
applicant follows all the laws of the municipality~ they have
the right to develop.
John Austin observed that all the engineering experts are
representing the applicant, and asked where are all the experts
going to be 15-20 years from now?
Ms. Leske asked what kind of buffer zone is there going to be
between the parking lots and the wetlands. Mr. Notopoulos
replied that some places will be more than 15 feet and some
will be closer; these areas will have grass pavers. There are
no plans showing this. Ms. Leske asked how much area is to be
filled? Mr. King replied that the plans before us show that
approximately 2000 sq. ft. in little spots clipping the
corners. The applicant will be replicating even more and
higher quality wetlands. Revised plans are not finalized so he
could not provide exact figures..
Ms. Leske asked if the water runoff from the Finast and Daves
St. parking lot was feeding the wetlands. Mr. King stated that
during storms it is recharging the wetland.
Gerald Buzanoski stated that Mr. McCormick should request
information from Mr. Sarvis and not the engineers. Plans are
available through the commission office. The commission feels
uneasy as the plans they have are obsolete. Mr Buzanoskl
stated that plans are being revised. Mr. Notopoulos stated
that the applicant will ask for the hearing to be continued in
writing. Mr. Borchert is concerned that the applicant is still
not providing enough of a buffer zone between the parking area
and the wetland. 15 feet is not what he had in mind for a
buffer zone between buildings and wetlands for protecting the
interests in this area. He stated that he wants it in the
record that the commission is advising the applicant this
before revised plans are complete. Mr. Notopoulos hopes that
none of the commissioners have preconceived notions of
prejUdice and will ignore the evidence provided.
Mr. Dunwiddie rephrased what Mr. Borchert said. He has been
going over other towns recommendations for 100 to 200 ft
buffers. What is the difference between this situation and
what other towns have adopted for buffers? We realize that
Nantucket has not adopted these, but would like the applicant
to provide information on why we should accept this 15 foot
buffer zone for this project.
Sid Conway stated that the area ]~ zoned for commercial use.
He is concerned with contamination of the groundwater at the
sewer beds.
Marie Schnetzler feels that the 15 foot natural buffer zone is
adequate to handle the amount of oil and gas that would come
from this project.
~:.
J
John Roe is concerned with the increase in the five year flood
of approximately 10 inches by his calculations. Mr. Notopoulos
stated that calculations are in the Notice of Intent and
revised plans will show less of an increase. Mr. King stated
that revised plans are trying to match the existing conditions,
not bringing any additional water into the area. Dunwiddie
commented that the question is changing the hydrology when
permeability is changed.
Malcom Soverino stated that the project will be used mostly ln
a time of year when the ground is not frozen.
Mort Slesinger stated that he did not feel that we should be
guinea pigs for finding out whether or not a IS foot buffer
zone is adequate when other towns are requiring 100 to 200 it
buffers.
Ms. Leske
request.
moved to continue the hearing at the applicants
So voted.
2. Madaket Realty Trust - SE48-363. Oakland St.
to close the hearing. So voted.
Lucy Leske moved
3. Thomas Barrows - SE48-3G7. Cambridge
Borchert moved to close the hearing.
and Tennessee
So voted.
Ave.
Carl
4. Granger Frost. 80 Madaket Rd.
hearing for a file number to be
Lee Dunn moved to continue
issued by DEQE. So voted.
the
5. John Kessler - l~ Wanoma Way. Carl Borchert moved to continue
the hearing as no representative was present and a file number
has not been issued by DEQE. So voted.
G. L. Dennis Shapiro - SE48-3G4 - Tristrams Ave. Carl Borchert
moved to close the hearing. So voted.
7. Ralph T. Seward - SE48-366 - Eel Point Road.
to close the hearing. So voted.
Lee Dunn moved
8. Martha Wells - Low Beach Rd. Lot ~o. The commission was
concerned with the possibility of the rare heathland species
found on the lot being disturbed. Lee Dunn moved to write a
letter to the applicant informing them of the commission
findings and to continue the hearing for a file. to be issued
by DEQE. So voted.
9. Martha Wells - Low Beach Rd. Lot 36.
continue the hearing. So voted.
Lee Dunn moved to
B. Regular Meeting:
1. Lucy Leske moved to approve the minutes of July 31, 1986 as
written. So voted.
2. Carl Borchert moved to approve the minutes of August 14v
6
1986 with one correction. 1. The commission asked the
Nantucket Commons Trust to supply design and specs of the oil
separators.
3. Request for Determinations
a. Pocomo Citizens -L. Leske moved to issue a positive
determination stating that the area described consists of
all land within 100 ft of the saltmarsh and of the isolated
freshwater wetland on the corner lot. The area also
includes the saltmarsh and the isolated wetlands themselves.
The 100 ft delineation will be marked on attached map.
b. Tim Lewis - Hummock Pond Rd. Carl Borchert moved to
issue a positive determination stating that this land is
within the buffer zone of an isolated freshwater wetland and
any project on this property within 75 feet from Hummock
Pond Road will require athe filing of a Notice of Intent.
4. Orders of Conditions:
a. Stephen McMaster - SE48-362 - 26 Western Ave. L. Leske
moved to issue orders of conditions adding I)Applicant will
move septic closer to the bottom of the bank, 2) A no
coastal revetment clause, 3) the appicant will install
snowfencing in the blowout area on the southeast corner of
the property to prevent further erosion from foot traffic
and wind. Carl Borchert opposed. So voted.
b. Madaket Realty Trust - SE48-3G3. L. Leske moved to Issue
Orders of Conditions adding: the applicant will place staked
hay bales between construction/excavation and the property
line to prevent siltation of White Goose Cove. So voted.
c. Thomas Barrows - SE48-367. L. Leske moved to Issue
standard orders of conditions. ~o Voted.
d. Ralph T. Seward - SE48-3GG. L. Leske moved to issue
orders of conditions adding 1) a no coastal revetment
clause, 2) no part of the coastal bank will be disturbed
during removal of structures and 3)all disturbed areas will
be revegetated with native materials. So voted.
e. L. Dennis Shapiro - SE48-3G4. Lee Dunn moved to issue
orders of conditions adding I) a no coastal revetment
clause, 2) stairway shall be built according to plans
submitted with the addition of an elevated walkway extending
from the top of the bank back 30 feet, after 30 feet,
walkway may be at ground level. 3) vegetation shall be
allowed to grow naturally below and around the walkway and
stairway to maintain stability of the coastal bank, and 4)
all disturbed areas shall be replanted with local native
vegetation. So voted.
5. Field Inspections:
a. Monday Sept. 2, 1986
Milton Rowland, Stuart Steele, Josaeph Teelier, Michael
Sparrough.
7
b. Monday Sept 8~ 1986
Design Associates, John Shugrue
G. Other Business:
a. Agricultural Restriction Act. frank and James Powers. A
draft of a recommendation from the Nantucket Planning Board
was presented to the commission. Lee Dunn moved to sign the
application expending a sum of *5,000 to assume deed
restrictions on the Powers property by the conservation
Commission. All in favor. So voted.
b. Enforcement order. L. Leske moved to issue an enforcement
order to M. P. and R. Gardner to cease removing material
from a wetland. So voted.
c. Brant Point Association - Jetties Beach Shack. The
commission stated that they will look into this matter.
7. All correspondence on the agenda was read and the commission
members suggested that a form lette be drafted stating that the
commission received such letters and that they were read at the
public meeting.
There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at
10:30 p.m.
8