Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986-11-25 Special Meeting Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission Town and County Building Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Minutes of November 25~ 1986 The special meeting of November 25~ 1986 was called to order at 7:30 p.m. Members present were: Peter Dunwiddie~ Lee Dunn~ Carl Borchert~ Lucy Leske~ William Willett~ Maryjane Williams and Donald Visco. 1. Nantucket Commons Trust - SE48-365. Lucy Leske opened the discussion on Orders of Conditions for this project by requesting that the discussion lean towards approval of the project. She feels that the Commission would have more control over the project than if DEQE issued superceeding conditions if appealed by the applicant. Donald Visco moved to approve the prject with conditions as suggested by the engineers of the applicant and of BSC and to have the Orders subject to review if soil conditions or ground water levels are found to be different than anticipated by the applicant or the Commission. Lucy Leske seconded the motion. Mr. Dunwiddie pointed out that the applicants response to BSC's report and new plans were submitted after the hearing was closed. Mr. Dunwiddie also discussed his and Mr. Dunn's calculations on the amount of undisturbed buffer. Calculations show somewhere between 2000 and 3000 square feet less undisturbed buffer by their calculations than what the applicant calculates. Mr. Borchert stated that he would like the discussion to lean towards denial of the project for these reasons: (1) the pollution to ground water is not minimized. Two of the wetlands are ground water wetlands. If the oil seperators fail~the pollution goes right into these wetlands. He suggests using settling ponds that would collect 100 year storm runoff as required in the Woodbury Lane development. (2) At the beginning of the hearings discussion was started at a fifty feet undisturbed buffer as being reasonable. He conce ded to a twenty-five feet buffer as being OK~ but the applicant still hasn't provided that. He is not so concerned with building three as much as he is concerned with the parking area by Hatch's as there is only a six foot setback. -', I Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission Town and County Building Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Minutes of November 25~ 1986 page 2 Mr. Borcert also stated that approval for this project would have to have so many Orders of Conditions that it would be too complicated to do and would lead to a major change of the plans. It is the burden of the applicant to provide plans that the Commission can approve. He stated that he is also concerned with the maintence requirements for this plan and the density of the project with twenty five feet setback requirements when the Commission requires a twenty five foot setback when there is only one dwelling. }lr. Borchert also discussed the lack of control the Commission will have on the Condo Association if and when the catch basins that are so crucial to pollution control are not cleaned. He also stated that there is not enough separation between the bottom of leach facilities and ground water to fillter heavy metals~ nitrates~ etc. Mr. Visco argued that the amount of pollution that this project will generate is minimal. The whole area around the project is Town water~ no one in the area is using wells. Lucy Leske feels that well designed~ well written Orders of Conditions can be written to protect the interests of the Act. Mr. Dunwiddie asked whether it was right for the Commission to write Orders of Conditions that incorporate the suggestions of BSC and the Commission when they would make major changes in the applicants plans. Lee Dunn discussed the precedent the Commission would set in approving a plan of this density with only a twenty-five foot set back requirement when the Commission is coming close to having in their By-laws a fifty foot set back requirement. Maryjane Williams expressed the same concern. Maryjane Williams expressed her concern with the 2000 to 3000 feet discrep- ency in undisturbed buffers. Mr. Borchert stated that pollution~ flood control~ wildlife~ groundwater protection are the interests that the applicant should protect for this project. Mr. Visco questioned the wildlife values that need to be protected. Mr. Dunwiddie read from MACC's newsletter of March/April 1986 regarding the Sweeden's Swamp issue of "the loss of wetlands from this project is avoid- able~ since there are other~ less environmentally damaging sites in the area which could satisfy the basic project purpose of providing retail shopping. Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission Town and County Building Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Minutes~of November 25~ 1986 page 3 A vote was taken on Mr. Visco's motion to approve the project. Donald Visco and Lucy Leske were in favor. All others against. William Willett moved to dency the project for the following reasons: 1) The twenty-five feet undisturbed buffer as requested by the Commission was not provided. 2) The wildlife~ groundwater protection and pollution interests were not adequately protected. Carl Borchert seconded the motion. Mr. Borchert stated that he feels the pollution and oil drip calculations provided by the applicant are incorrect. He feels the amount is ten times greater than reported. He also feels that the whole pollution scheme depends entirely on a maintence schedule impossible to enforce. Prevention of pollution is two fold:(l) to the ground water and (2) to the wetlands. Mr. Dunn noted that according to BSC's testimony the minimal amount of distance provided between the leaching facilities and separators and ground water allows infiltration of other pollutants other than oil. Mr. Borchert stated that the application is too complicated to write Orders of Conditions for and would change plans drastically and that the applicant should reapply without prejudice by the Commission on any new plans submitted. Mr. Willett's motion stands that the application does not adequately protect 1) Prevention of pollution - separation between the catch basins and and leaching facilities and ground water does not prevent infiltration of pollutants and the maintence schedule required for the catch basins is impossible to enforce. 2) Wildlife - the applicant did not provide the minimum of twenty five feet buffer as requested by the Commission which was based on test- imony given by BSC~ Nantucket Land Council~ and abbutters. 3) Any Orders of Conditions that the Commission could come up with that would adequately protect these interests would put them in an engineering position and therefor would be too complicated to write and enforce and would be a major change in the plans presented by the applicant. ",~"TUCIr~~ ~~ )- v .~ !~~i t:~J:i ~~.. ~~~-I.~I ('..... -"f't= --:::>-. ......... t:I ,:< 0-9~........,:,~. , "'ORA1~ ..~ ......". Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission Town and County Building Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Minutes of November 25~ 1986 A vote was taken on Mr. Willett's motion to deny the project. Lucy Leske and Donald Visco opposed. All others in favor. The motion to deny the project was passed. Mr. Robert Sarvis stated that he would like it on the record that he feels that Mr. Borchert is and has been biased and would like a copy of tonight's tape. There being no further business the meeti~was adjourned at 9:00 p.m.