HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-08-31
. ....',....~
L'P~~~
itl '"P~
..o.~~\U\i
It"+,.;~~f~:
\. ~~~~~~~/~S
~-i'.. ~~"'"- ;" $
"I;. "..... -'-'ft:=~. ..........'O,l
".r...o~;,-........:.~. ~4'
",,'."'ORA1~ it"''''
..........."".
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
(508) 228- 7230
6 Chestnut Street
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
MeetinQ Minutes AUQust 31. 1989
The meeting was called to order at 7:09 PM in the Selectmen's
Meeting Room of the Town and County Building. All Commissioners
were present along with Administrator Ben McKelway and Secretary
Bruce Perry.
A.
COMMENTS FROM PRESS AND PUBLIC
None
At this time Chairman Willet went out of order and opened
discussions with Mr. James Hawkes of Esters Island.
Mr. Hawkes reads from a proposal that he has drawn up
concerning protection of Smith Point/Esters Island from
vehicle traffic. The proposal summarizes the effects of
vehicles breaking down the coastal bank and causing
considerable erosion to the island. He proposes that the
Commission fund the purchase of snow fencing and signs to
prohibit vehicular traffic beyond a certain point. He is
willing to allow foot traffic over his property to allow
people to get all the way to the point. He is willing to
provide the labor to erect the fence and the signs. He adds
that in 1954 a large amount of his property (5 acres) was
taken by the Town as shoreline preservation. The action that
he wants is to close off town land and also protect his from
increased erosion.
Mr. Willet comments that the Commission will look into the
issue and discuss it next meeting.
Mr. Dauch, also a resident of Ester Island, comments that
approximately 9-12 rolls of snow fence would be needed for the
project.
Mr. Visco adds that the property owners may have to press
charges against violators in order to get the attention of
some of the people. The staff should get the tax maps from the
registry and have them for the field inspection next week. The
land owner has private property rights to the low tide mark.
Mr Wasierski states that he would be willing to fund the
work on the Town property.
t ...-"""'~
~~~TUC ,~
o!t"r~~ --!!t't...
;y ~ () "*1-"''$
l.~ "'"p"
_~: 1 ,j,\U\;
t :~ _.IJI;a
I-.~",,-.:...,~- '~:' :
. \--.,w:::~ '" ..:
.~_~_:::.>...'-t,.",..'"
't.~" :;;s-~- /" ~
'\., c-.....~. .....,,'0 $
'I6._0~p"""""Q' ~
"",,'.':"ORA1\ .,.......
'-........'"
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
(508) 228- 7230
6 Chestnut Street
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Meeting Minutes August 31, 1989 Page 2
Mr. Dunwiddie concurs, commenting that with erosion all
over the island that the Commission should direct its efforts
towards Town-owned land.
B.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Longview Realty Trust - 53 Madaket Road - SE48-546 (41-326)
MOTION: To continue due to lack of representation and
additional information was made and seconded.
UNANIMOUS
2. Dias - 1 Pilot Whale Lane - SE48-554 (67-386,394-403)
MOTION: To continue at the request of the applicant was
made and seconded.
UNANIMOUS
3. Cabral - 10 Pond Street - SE48-555 (56-294)
MOTION: To continue until the September 28 hearing at
the request of the applicant was made and seconded.
UNANIMOUS
4. Swift - 7 Old Quidnet Milk Route - SE48-564 (20-54.3)
Present for the applicant were Stephen Swift and Jeff
Blackwell of Hart and Blackwell Surveyors.
Mr. Swift submits a plan showing the driveway relocated to
area requested by the Commission.
Mr. Dunwiddie comments that a waiver will have to be
requested in one section of the driveway because it will not
have a 25-foot undisturbed buffer from the wetlands.
..
~"""'IirII,
r~fl.~TUCJr;"'~
fr~r~1;\
_~!1 \(JI~
tOL -ilJl!
I-..,~ ~-:'.
. \ .2r-=_ ~ I:!
.,....~.. ~~","-i~~
'\ C'.....~....,..:::>--..........'O,$'
"'6.o~"...........~. "'~
.,......,..ORA1~ it.......
.........1111'''.
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
(508) 228- 7230
6 Chestnut Street
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Meeting Minutes August 31, 1989 Page 3
Mr. Borchert explains that the Commission needs a letter
requesting the waiver and the reasons for it.
Mr. Dunwiddie comments that he would like to see the
dimensions of fill and the height of the bridge.
Mr. Swift responds that Jeff Blackwell had taken the
drawing from the last meeting and drew it to fit the grade of
the property.
Mr. Visco questions about the load capacity of the bridge
and comments that the bridge will have to be improved before
any work at the new house could be done. He adds that it would
be horrible to have a fire and not be able to get the
equipment up to the house.
Mr. Dunwiddie questions the need for the Commission to get
overly involved with the construction of the bridge.
Mr. Visco respond that if the bridge fails then they will
point to the Commission and say that they approved it. I am
concerned that the bridge construction will handle emergency
vehicles. The easiest method might be to put in a precast
concrete culvert. He said because the driveway is the
applicant's only access, it has to be approved.
Mr. McKelway disagreed with Mr. Visco, pointing out that
310 CMR 10.53 ("limited projects") says the Commission may
allow a wetland crossing if "reasonable alternative means of
access from a public way to an upland area... is unavailable."
The definition of reasonable is subject to interpretation of
the Commission, applicants, and courts. Reminding the
Commission of a principle that he said applies to other cases
in addition to the Swift application, Mr. McKelway stressed
the word "may." He said that the Commission is under no
obligation to approve wetland crossings, and that a denial
could force the applicant to negotiate an easement with a
neighbor to enter the property through upland instead. He
said this is the situation with the Luntz-Emerson case, which
is on appeal, and could apply to the Dias application now
pending before the Commission.
~.....~
~TUC 'I"
l to. ~-...!!t~
0/ ..:' ~io
It I .....~
-o:~\U\;,
. _:lJIa
tl-:","'~'~' ~.,:
.~~~-- - , '. a
\~_~ ~ ~ i..:..
4" ~~=--i^~
~ ~.....~-.....'",,'O.:'
~.o Ii> "........... ~. ~
v.....,rORA1~ ,.......
............'".
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
(508) 228- 7230
6 Chestnut Street
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Meeting Minutes August 31, 1989 Page 4
Mr. Swift states that he will bring in a sketch of a
culvert in the ditch versus the wooden bridge. If an engineer
were to draw up the plans, he would have to be very safe with
his calculations.
Mr. Dunn comments that the concrete culvert will be an
impediment to wildlife.
Mr. Dunwiddie reiterates his comments on the Commission's
authority to review and approve designs.
Mr. Borchert comments that it would be nice to be sure that
the bridge is safe.
Mr. McKelway ask if there are any plans to clear the ditch
and drain the swamp?
Mr. Swift responds that he has no such plans and would be
willing to make such a prohibition part of the Order of
Conditions.
Mr. McKelway asks about plans to grade the driveway and add
material to the surface?
Mr. Swift responds that he has no plans to grade the
driveway or to add gravel to its surface. Presently he has no
plans to use the dwelling in the winter.
Mr. McKelway asks the Commission if they would like the
house and septic locations to be staked?
Mr. Dunn responds that they are located far enough away
that they should not be a problem.
MOTION: To continue the hearing for a DEP file number,
response from the Natural Heritage Program and more
information at the request of the applicant was made and
seconded.
UNANIMOUS
5. Hugret - 11 Wauwinet Road - SE48-563 (20-43)
.....,..........,
~~14TliC-'"
!t~()~~-~,
I~ '/ ..:So ~
:;~!, \~~
tOi -ilJll
I-;,",~ ,~_ ~,,:
.\~-~ I~!
...\ ~-0, -/~$
'fo.1--^, ~_. .''0 ~
'\ ..'0.... ~ ....... ~
.,~ '9"..........~. ","
"''''.''ORA1~ it"'"
..........."".
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
(508) 228- 7230
6 Chestnut Street
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Meeting Minutes August 31, 1989 Page 5
Present for the applicant were John Shugrue and Sarah
Alger of Reade and Alger, Counsel.
Mr. Dunn abstains from the discussion.
Mr. Willet reads the comments of phone calls with Health
Inspector Richard Ray. Mr. Ray comments that the Board of
Health has the authority to grant variances but he would only
recommend replacing the capacity of the existing system and
not an expansion. He said that a variance would not be qiven
if the proposed flow is in excess of 220 gallons per day, the
standard flow for a 2-bedroom home. Presently the proposal is
for 440 per day. The size of the leaching fields would have to
be reduced appropriately based on formulas that John Shugrue
should know.
Mr. Shugrue responds that the revised plan is for 220
gallons per day. His clients are asking for a variance for
wetlands setback for the septic system and sideline setback
for the proposed addition.
Mr. McKelway comments that the leaching field is still
proposed to be the same size contrary to Mr. Ray's advice to
the Commission.
Mr. Shugrue states that if Richard Ray wants to design and
guarantee the system then he could make these changes, but I
am unwilling to do this. The sewage is to be pumped up hill
and at some times the extra size will be needed to handle the
surcharge. The existing well located by Marland Rounsville
produces good water in the middle of the lawn. Richard Ray
wants the well moved to the other edge of the wetland where
there might not be good water available.
Mr. Borchert comments that if the soil conditions were as
bad as anticipated, then he would also recommend a larger
leaching field. If the design says two bedrooms then
enforcement can be for two bedrooms.
..-',....~
~e14TUe ,~
~'!lr~to: --!!..~~
I. ()~:~."
It "'-PiS
-o:~J\U\l
tl"'+"'~. ~i~:
. \ ~~~ .I'::!
~~" ~~","-I"" $
'\ "..... ~-.....,",'O,l
"6,O~::..........~. ""~
",,''-ORA1... ~..\"
........11..'''.
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
(508) 228- 7230
6 Chestnut Street
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Meeting Minutes August 31, 1989 Page 6
Mr. Visco agrees with Mr. Borchert and states that it makes
sense to over-design this system, but he said the 2-bedroom
limit could not be enforced.
Mr. Shugrue adds that he has revised the plans to show the
area that would need the waiver for the addition.
Cheryl Creighton of the Nantucket Land council asks if the
Commission would be willing to put the limitation of two
bedrooms in the Order of Conditions. The original application
asks for two additional bedrooms.
MOTION: To close the hearing and draft an Order of
Conditions was made and seconded.
UNANIMOUS
6. Wright/Horgan - 29 Medouie Creek Road - SE48-564 (14-35)
Present were Robert Wright applicant, John Horgan lot
owner, Bob Emack of Nantucket Surveyors, Kevin Dale of
Vaughan, Dale and Philbrick Counsel, J. Gwynne Thorsen
architect.
Mr. McKelway explains the color-coded map showing areas of
brushcutting, location of the driveway and house locations. He
reads the inspection report commenting that the wetland
flagging is adequate with some more discussion needed on the
grove of Tupelo trees. There is a red maple swamp bordered by
a shrub swamp. The driveway is shown to go through the tupelo
grove.
Kevin Dale questions whether the tupelos are a protected
wetland. The state regulations say that they might be part of
a bordering vegetated wetland.
Mr. Dunwiddie comments that over 50 percent of the plants
are listed as wetland species then it could be considered a
wet area. This is a unusual situation. There were pits dug to
a depth of eight feet without hitting groundwater. The state
does not look at soil conditions in making their decision. The
. .....'.."..~
~e~TUC "
~~~~--t~~
~~/ '~-s.1.
i~!~\~~
0: _:1JI2
II-'~-i' :
\.\~~~~~.i~!
.,:"~.. ~~=--l~~
"' C'..... ~~~......,,'O ~
...""'O-9::........,;,~. ~..
",,""ORA1~ it"""
.............".
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
(508) 228- 7230
6 Chestnut Street
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Meeting Minutes August 31, 1989 Page 7
tupelo grove appears to be contiguous with the swamp but we
did not do any specific calculations to prove this.
Robert Wright comments that the prevailing winds are from
the southwest. If the tupelos are not cut down, then the house
will be on the lee side and subject to mosquitoes bugs and no
air movement.
Mr. Dunwiddie states that he is not convinced with that
argument. The applicant would be able to brushcut around the
house to provide air around the house. The lot is in the
middle of a salt marsh and when the mosquitoes are out you
will be in the thick of it with or without the brushcutting. I
would be comfortable with some brushcutting, but trees like
this are not common on Nantucket.
Mr. Wright responds that by cutting the trees would provide
the only views on the lot. The lot is 5.6 acres. I am only
trying to cut a small area of a large lot for viewing
purposes.
Mr. Wasierski asks what type of root system do tupelo trees
have?
Mr. Dunwiddie responds that they have a shallow system and
that they might be clones from the same root system.
Mr. Ed Kinsen, an abutter, comments that he is concerned
about the size of the buildings on the lot and the neighbor's
views.
Mr. Wright respond that he had attempted to place the house
to minimize the impact on the neighbors.
Mr. Emack comments that during the field inspection the
Commissioners walked the wetlands. The stand of tupelos
appears to be isolated from the wetlands and does not actually
appear to be a wetlands. The state regulations call for water
at or near the surface. In two test pits of nine and seven
foot depths, there was no groundwater.
~ .....'.....~l
l>jr?~~T~~
l~ ..1-~
t~i 1 ~ i
t;i~: ~ ~l.. i
\~-..::.- - l....;:
4" ~--~"'" '-" ;:
~ ('..... -'-'ft:=..,..=-- ..........'0 $
~.o~::..........~. ~
"'''''',1"'0 RA1.. ,.......
.............".
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
(508) 228- 7230
6 Chestnut Street
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Meeting Minutes August 31, 1989 Page 8
Mr. Wright comments that he was prepared to propose that
the trees be transplanted. He was surprised that the trees
would not survive.
Mr. Emack comments that the trees are now closely spaced
and could be thinned out to allow greater growth.
Mr. Dunwiddie states that the trees could be thinned but
would not survive the transplantation.
Mr. Glen Thorsen suggests that the trees be moved up by the
second smaller house or to a plateau near the road. He
comments about Dias' machine used to move trees.
Mr. Dunwiddie responds that the machine is fine for moving
individual trees but in this case the trees are connected to
the same root system. Some of the smaller trees might survive.
Mr. Wright suggest that a small number of the trees might
be moved and see if they survive. If it does not work, then we
can try something else.
Mr. Dunwiddie responds that it would be difficult to
replace these trees because commercial nurseries do not grow
wetland trees.
Mr. McKelway asks the applicant the size of his proposed
lawn.
Mr. Wright responds that he plans to have sod around the
houses and between the dwellings. He is trying to put
dwellings that are appropriate to the location.
Mr. McKelway asks for details on the maintenance of the
front yard and driveway.
Mr. Wright responds that they plan to allow the scrub to
grow back to 2-3 foot height.
Mr. Wasierski asks the size of the garage.
. .....,....~
!l",,~14TU eJr;"
L.~~~t~
l~~ \y ~
to: 1 \U\;,
1-. _.IJI~
i"''' ~i'. i
..~_ ==o>...'!./...
""'\ ~-;... -/~A"'''''''
\;A'_" - - "" ..
'r^... ~~ .''0:'
...'0.. -........ ,,"
"--' If?::.......... ~. ~
....,...-.:ORA1~ ~..'"''
-............'".
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
(508) 228- 7230
6 Chestnut Street
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Meeting Minutes August 31, 1989 Page 9
Mr. Thorsen responds that the building envelope is shown on
the plan and measures 26 x 26 feet.
Mr. Wright adds that the intent of the three buildings is
to reduce the impact to the property.
John Horgan comments that he is one of the eight people who
subdivided the 280 plus acres in 1973. Of that parcel 180
acres has been given to conservation. The development was
designed to be low density from the beginning. He asks that
the Commission consider the development as a whole when
considering restrictions on this lot.
Mr. Dunn commented that his position has merit and is
somewhat like the Gifford situation. This stand of tupelos
does not show itself as a wetland. Maybe he could replicate on
other parts of the property.
Mr. Wasierski agrees with Mr. Dunn. Possibly this could be
used as a test case on how to transplant tupelo trees. If it
does not work there could be some replication of the trees.
Mr. Dale asks for some direction from the Commission.
Mr. McKelway comments that the Commission needs to decide
if the tupelo grove is to be considered a wetland or not. If
it is, then the driveway should be moved outside the
boundaries. It is not the only access to the lot.
Mr. Dunn reiterates that this is a different case. The
intent from the beginning was not to develop the property to
the maximum allowed. There has already been considerable
efforts to protect the sensitive areas.
Mr. Dunwiddie strongly urges the applicant get a clear
determination on whether or not this is a wetland. There could
be a good case for appeal due to the vegetation. He hesitates
to do all this with another access possible.
Mr. Wasierski says that the inspection team should look
from the stand of tupelo trees to the swamp and determine if
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
(508) 228- 7230
6 Chestnut Street
Nantucket. Massachusetts 02554
Meeting Minutes August 31, 1989 Page 10
the trees are joined to the swamp by continuous wetland
vegetation -- bordering vegetated wetland.
Mr. Thorsen asks if the applicant could thin or prune the
trees to reduce the height.
Mr. Dunwiddie comments that they could do the reverse of
what is usually done -- cut the big trees and leave the
smaller ones.
MOTION: To continue the hearing for more information and
another inspection of the property was made and seconded.
UNANIMOUS
7. Sesachacha Pond - Quidnet - (23-2)
Representing the applicant was Diane McColl of the DPW
and the Pond Management Committee.
Mr. Wasierski states that he will not abstain from the
discussion. He has resigned from the Pond Management Committee
in order to be able to discuss this issue on the Conservation
Commission.
Mr. Dunwiddie abstains from the discussion.
Mr. Visco asks if the application is for a limited time?
Ms. McColl responds that it is from now on for the semi-
annual opening. This will enable the Town to manage the pond
as it see fit. There will not be a specific date of the
openings but only a range. Some of the determining factors
will be weather, tides, and the size of the head on the pond.
Mr. Borchert comments that he would have difficulty
allowing a twice per year opening without some more specific
information on the timing.
Mr. Visco states that the Committee can research when the
best time really is.
ff ....'..."...11,
~e~TUe ,~
I:."~,.:~>-...~~
~~Y ..1-\
~~!~\~~
0: _:1JI2
It-'-"'&~i' :
\.\~~~"-/..
<;~~;:' /.~'i
'Co, (;>.....-:=.....=-...........'0 ~
~. 0 ~^........... ~. ...~
~..',.ORA1~ ..........
............,,,.
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
(508) 228- 7230
6 Chestnut Street
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Meeting Minutes August 31, 1989 Page 11
Mr. Borchert adds that it could still be a range of time;
just narrow it down.
Mr. George Andrews, a member of the Pond Management
Committee, comments that any time in the last three weeks of
April would be fine for the opening. In the fall, any time in
late September or October would work.
Mr. Peter Dunwiddie is recognized by the Chairman and asks
if the pond opening is tied to the salinity of the water? Is
there any linkage between pond salinity and the opening?
Ms. McColl states that there is a list of factors that are
going to be monitored in the attached report.
Mr. Visco comments that the idea is to maintain the
fisheries. Salinity is not a factor for the fisheries. If you
let the fish in, then you have to let them out.
Mr. Dunn asks when the pond was last opened in the fall.
Ms. McColl states that it was in the fall of 1980.
Mr. Wasierski states that the pond usually closes faster in
the spring than the fall. The problem is keeping the pond open
long enough.
Mr. Dunn comments that the length of time the pond is to be
kept open and the means of keeping it open for this time frame
need to be detailed and documented as part of this
application.
Ms. McColl states that after the pond is open for one week,
then nature can take its course and close the pond. This is
stated in the Kelly and Aubrey reports that are appendices to
the Notice of Intent.
MOTION: To continue the hearing for additional
information and a DEP file number was made and seconded.
UNANIMOUS
. ~.....~
~TUe ,~
l~-~~
1ft, \~\
to'~'IJI~
t-i~. '~i'. i
. ~~~~~/.......
<~" ~=--l^,.i
.. "..... ~. .........'0 ~
~...O~::........o;'~. -$'
..,...."rORA1'" ,..,'Ii
........111"".
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
(508) 228-7230
6 Chestnut Street
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Meeting Minutes August 31, 1989 Page 12
8. Nantucket Islands Land Bank - Lily Pond (23-2)
Mr. Borchert and Visco abstain from the proceedings.
Present far the applicant were Dawn Darbey Land Bank
Director and Andrea Stevens Resource Planner far the Land
Bank.
Mr. McKelway states that before the hearing is opened the
issue of the filing fee must be cleared up.
Ms. Stevens submits a letter to the Commission asking that
they vote to waive the Town's portion of the fee.
Mr. McKelway explains that because the Land Bank is a
county agency they cannot be exempted from the fees. The state
regulations specifically exclude the Federal Government, the
State, Cities and Towns from the filing fees. In discussions
with the State, DEP representatives said they are unable to
waive the fees because there was not any means to do it set up
in the law. They also said they were unsure whether the local
share could be waived also. Such waivers are not specifically
prohibited in the law.
MOTION: To waive the local portion of the Notice of
Intent filing fee and collect only the State's portion was
made and seconded.
UNANIMOUS
Mr. Willet reads from the inspection report commenting that
the farmer pond has filled in naturally with cattails. About
half of the proposed pond is now lawn area. Comments from the
inspection team are concerning the regulation of the outfall
pipe, how many willows will be removed, depth of ditches to
dredged.
Mr. McKelway adds that the burden of proof is an the
applicants to shaw that the change is an improvement to the
site. It is doubtful that open water can be called an
improvement aver Bordering Vegetated Wetlands. There needs to
be mare detailed information an wildlife in the area.
..
~'''"''''4
'~fl:14TUCJr;~
l~r-~~~
If~ ","piS
tOi~d\<c,i
t-i"'" ~~ ~i' :
.\~-~ ~~/:!
,\ ~~. - .tr..;...
'S..~.. '-~___~=- 1.11..;:
'" "..... -'-'ft:=.....=-- ..........'0 $
~.O~~.......... '\). r$
.,....',,-ORA1... it""'"
............,,,.
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
(508) 228- 7230
6 Chestnut Street
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Meeting Minutes August 31, 1989 Page 13
Mr. Dunwiddie asks if the Commission has ever denied a pond
creation? ( the Commission was unsure. )
The Commission reads letters from:
Susan and Peter Lowenstein
Blackberry Lane
Nantucket
Millicent and Shaun Ruddy
8 Westchester Street
Nantucket
Both of whom are opposed to the project
Ned Rorem
28 Westchester Street
Nantucket
Robert and Erna Blair
6 Wesco Place
Nantucket (former owners)
Both of whom are in favor of the project
Mr. Willet reads notes on conversations with Health
Inspector Richard Ray commenting that the coliform levels are
quite high in the area. The cattails help absorb some of these
bacteria. He was concerned that the open water may allow more
bacteria into the harbor. The specific source of the pollution
has not been determined.
Ms. Stevens states that the property is approximately five
and one half acres. She submits a drawing from David Laws,
landscape architect. The proposed pond is to be one quarter in
size. The other work to be done is to remove clogging
vegetation and willow control. Half of the pond will remove
BVW. The cattail removal will be 5930 square feet of a 64,000-
square-foot wetland in the area ( 9.25X)~ The headwall is to
be cleared and allow better circulation. The creation of the
pond will not increase flooding in the area.
Ms. Darbey comments that when the Land Bank was proposing
to purchase the property, it had opened discussions with the
Town on repair and maintenance of the pipe. This was in 1986
and a warrant article was supposed to be submitted by the Town
for Town Meeting but has not as of yet. It is the
responsibility of the Town to do the project.
..
.. .....".."~l
,.~,..NTUCJr;~~
~/~r~-s.\
t~~i _~i
t-.~ ~i.:
.\~_~ ~~ i:1
~\ ~-;,.. -i~$
\,r"... -'-'ft:=--:::>-o - .' '0 ~
'" 0 ... .... " ~..
"'"". I9p........:..~. ~
.,4lIo....'ORA1~ ........
............,..
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
(508) 228- 7230
6 Chestnut Street
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Meeting Minutes August 31, 1989 Page 14
Ms. Stevens adds that all the proposed work is to be on
Land Bank property.
Mr. Dunn asks if the work will affect the amount of water
on and off the property ?
Ms. Stevens responded that the work should not increase
water to the property.
Mr. John Huesen: A lot of water is coming on to my
property, and it did not before. By removing nine percent of
the vegetation and adding the additional runoff from the
Woodbury Lane subdivision, I am worried about increased
flooding.
Mr. Dunn responds that there will be no increased flows
from the Woodbury Lane project. We spent a lot of time and
effort to ensure that it would not happen.
Mr. Huesen asks that the outlet be maintained to control
the water.
Ruth Rosenwasser, an abutter, asks the cost of the project.
She adds that there could be something better to do with the
Land Bank funds. The representation of the project may be
incorrect.
Ms. Darbey responds that the estimates of the cost are
about $50,000 dollars. Since the acquisition of the property,
the Land Bank's intent is to use the property as an in-town
sanctuary. The work will increase the quality of the habitat.
Harvy Rosenwasser asks the location of the parking lot, the
additional recreational opportunities, costs of upkeep and
maintenance, the need for scientific data on the water flows.
Ms. Stevens responds that the parking lot is located on
Liberty Street at least 100 feet from any resource area with
space for 5-7 cars. The recreational opportunities will be ice
skating. There will be no picnic tables, chairs, etc. It is
intended to be passive recreation only. I do not foresee an
increase in garbage disposed on the site.
.. .....'..."~l
,..~,..14TUelr;#,,'&.
J:. <>r-~1-~~
itl '"P~
-o:~~\U\i
tl-:"'" .,~~::~:
. \ ., ~~-- - -... 1 . ·
".\~~ - ~-........:
'Co ...,.. '--....~=- ll\. ;:
'i1'''''^' -'-'ft:=-..-=-- .' '0 :'
'C!'-'O'" .... >.; ~
if._ l 19 ,............c. '\). ~
....,..-.:ORA1~ ~......
............"".
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
(508) 228- 7230
6 Chestnut Street
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Meeting Minutes August 31, 1989 Page 15
Ms. Darbey adds that they have a landscape manager that
mows the property weekly and trims the brush from the paths.
The Land Bank was originally approached to construct an early
childhood area but that was denied. We want to promote passive
recreation.
Mr. Rosenwasser comments that he is troubled by some of the
Land Bank's responses. The development and signs at the new
parking lot will draw more people to park there, even people
who are not using the park.
Virginia Townsend, 28 Lily Street, comments that she was
assured when the Land Bank bought the property that there
would be very little change in the property.
Mr. Dunwiddie responds that he has been involved with the
property for a long time. While the area may look wild it is
far from being natural. The area has a long history of being
manipulated. There are few native plants. I am surprised that
this is being objected on ecological grounds. The mix of open
water and BVW would increase the diversity to the area. I have
been involved with a large number of Towns that are trying to
create parks and ponds just like this one. This is the first
community that is opposed to the pond. By denying the
community access to the water how will we learn to be safe
around water? The Town of Nantucket has fewer urban parks than
most communities. The fears of the opponents are that it will
be used as park. The high coliform counts have no specific
source identified. It has been shown in a large number of
cases that high coliform counts can be related to people
walking dogs.
Mr. Rosenwasser responds that the discussion is on
improving the area but it has been changing for the last 200
years. You cannot rely on the judgment of children to prevent
an accident. Presently there is not a large seven-foot hole
for kids to fall into and hurt themselves. The entire island
is a park to a lot of people.
MOTION: To continue the hearing for more information and
a DEP file number was made and seconded.
. ~...u~
,.~~llTU eJrJ.#,,+,.
_# ~~-~)- J~
l.,~~/ ..~~~
~!1 ..J, \~ 'i
tOi~ ilJl~
....i~":..~"'...,-- ~" -
. . -.,~~~ ow ...
.~-- ~I.".",.."
""~.. ~~~- ;"- i
,,,.....~..........'O$
;,,,,,0 ~ ,:........;. \). ~..
v....~ORA1~ :t""~
............" ,,'
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
(508) 228- 7230
6 Chestnut Street
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Meeting Minutes August 31, 1989 Page 16
UNANIMOUS
c.
REGULAR MEETING
1.
REQUEST FOR DETERMINATION
a. Peter and Maria Kellner - 39 Quidnet Road (21-26.7)
Present were Peter and Maria Kellner
Mr. McKelway comments that this was an unapproved dock that
Henry and I saw when we were inspecting another property. We
asked them to come in ask for the approval.
Mr Kellner states that the dock is 74" x 75". It is removed
in the fall. We felt that we were doing more damage dragging
the canoe over the wetlands than this dock is doing.
Mr. Dunwiddie comments that he does not have a problem with
a small structure that is used only seasonally.
MOTION: To issue a negative determination commenting
that the work is within an area subject to protection but
will not alter the area was made and seconded.
UNANIMOUS
b. Shapiro/Marden - Pocomo Road - (15-17,18)
Present for the applicant was Reginald Marden.
Mr. Willet reads the inspection report
MOTION: To approve the five separate requests as applied
for on the Request for Determination commenting that the
work is within a area subject to protection and within the
buffer zone, but will not alter the area was made and
seconded.
UNANIMOUS
4 ........"~
,..~~~TU eJr;'~'
l<>r~~~
Iff. '"piS
-o:~.J\U\;'
t . _.IJI~
t-:"-'~~i. :
.\,. ~ "-1..
,..\~-~. ~ ......~
~~.. ~'..~"'" IA;:
'JS! "..... ~- .........'0 I
,,""'0-'9:;0.......... ~. .$'
.,..~ORA1~ it"'"
............,,,.
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
(508) 228- 7230
6 Chestnut Street
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Meeting Minutes August 31, 1989 Page 17
c. Lindsay - Wauwinet Road - (12-39)
Mr. McKelway states that the application was withdrawn
at the request of the applicant.
d. Winston - Wauwinet - (12-8)
Present were the applicant Charles Winston and John
Shugrue, agent.
Mr. Willet reads the inspection report commenting that it
is difficult to determine the rear edge of the dune. The
applicant is expecting a positive determination but would like
some direction as to whether this project could be approved.
The moved house would have to be on pilings and would provide
a ocean view. The septic system would have to be moved as it
is in the back of the house, now.
Mrs. Enid Williams, an abutter, was recognized and
commented that the applicants wants to move his house closer
to a primary dune. It is a very fragile area. The move would
threaten the scenic beauty and safety provided by the dune.
Mrs. Arnold, 123 Wauwinet Road an abutter, adds that the
barrier beach has been recognized as one of the most scenic
barrier beaches on the East coast. I am worried about the
scenic views of the house if it were moved and put up on
pilings. What criteria do you use in determining the effects
on scenic views?
Mr. Dunwiddie responds that it is primarily the height of
the structure relative the surrounding structures.
Ms. Martha Boynton, an abutter, states that this is a
fragile dune area and part of the barrier beach.
Mr. Wasierski asks where the barrier beach ends.
Mr. McKelway responds that it ends just north of the
Wauwinet House property. This make the house on an officially
designated barrier beach.
.
~.....~
~TUe ,~
~40. ~-...!!..e-~
I. ()/ ,:- A"\
1~1 ..',7..
_~!1 \~~
tOE _j1Jl2
1-." -' -,' ,;
01, /010
,..\~- ......~
~A,.. - -. ';::- /'^, ;:
''(>, -'-'ft:=.....=-- ..' '0 ;:
0... ... ~ ~
it._ t ~ ,.:........i! <J. ~
"",.-.:ORA1~ to"\''''
............,,,.
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
(508) 228- 7230
6 Chestnut Street
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Meeting Minutes August 31, 1989 Page 18
Mr. Borchert comments that the applicant's comments
concerning the dangers of the overhead powerline are not as
frivolous it may seem. More information needs to received
concerning the size of the utility line and the number of
months that the applicant is in the house.
Mrs. Arnold comments that the residents in the area are
having the utilities put underground at a cost of $600 per
house.
Mr. Winston states that the electric line is a 35 - 50 KVA
line with a step down transformer on the pole 15 feet from my
house. Only the wires are going underground. The transformer
will remain above ground so there came be access to work on
it. The house was originally put on a footpath that has been
widened to a road and had clay added to it. The dust into my
house is intolerable. I am asking for direction on moving my
house closer to the dune but not on top of it.
MOTION: To issue a positive determination commenting
that all the work is on a barrier beach and is subject to
protection was made and seconded.
UNANIMOUS
2.
ORDERS OF CONDITIONS
a. Tristrams Long Pond Owners - (59,60-)
Present were Arlene Pacquette, President of the
Homeowners Association, George Nyren area resident.
Mr. McKelway comments that the Commission has received the
map that was required in section 3 of the draft Order of
Conditions. This section is no longer necessary.
Mrs. Pacquette comments that at the end of the three-year
project, the cattails will be at the levels of the 1975
mapping.
. ....,........~
"-:')J ~TU C ,~
,,~~~~-~,
~"/ ..1-\
g~!~\~~
0: -ilJll
tt-.~~. ~,,:
.\~_-==--- .'!..1:'
,.. ~~ - .,....:-
'S..~.. '-.....--~"'" 1."- ;:
""c-..... ~-.........'O$
;'ot.._O~:'-''''''''''~' ~
v4lt.'.....ORA1~ ~..~..
'..........."".
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
(508) 228- 7230
6 Chestnut Street
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Meeting Minutes August 31, 1989 Page 19
There was some more discussion concerning the plans and the
amounts of vegetation to be removed.
Mr. Wasierski comments that he was surprised that most of
the removal was along Land bank and Conservation Foundation
property and not on the Tristram's Landing side.
MOTION: To accept the Draft Order of Conditions with the
changes in section 3 (the supplying of the plan of work)
and section 5 (requiring a plan showing work each year that
was done) was made and seconded.
UNANIMOUS
ADDITIONAL SPECIAL CONDITIONS
TRISTRAM'S LONG POND OWNERS ASSOCIATION
DEQE FILE NUMBER SE48-562
C/O MS. ARLENE PAQUETTE
UNDER THE MASSACHUSETTS WETLANDS PROTECTION ACT
( MGL CHAPTER 131, SECTION 40 )
AND THE WETLANDS BYLAW OF THE TOWN OF NANTUCKET
( CHAPTER 136 )
UNDER THE NANTUCKET WETLANDS BYLAW:
The project is approved as specified by the Notice of Intent and
all attachments, the most recent plans cited on Form 5, the
general and special conditions on Form 5, and the following
additional special conditions. However, if there is a conflict
between this Order and the application or plans, this Order shall
prevail.
3. If any material is to be permanently deposited at a site
other than the Town Landfill, the Commission must be notified
of this in writing before such material is deposited.
4. Members, employees, and agents of the Commission shall have
the right to enter and inspect the premises to evaluate
compliance with the conditions and performance standards
stated in this Order and the Nantucket Wetlands Regulations
4 .....,......~
~~NTUe ~#.
l~r~~~ -rtt"
~~ ..-s.\
!~., '1t'v.-:.
to: , -ilJl'i
t-:~~ _,' :
. \., ~~ - -... 1 . ::
.~-- ~- .......
\~\ ~"- $
y^, -'-'ft:=...-=_ .' '0 ~
.. ,"'0'" .,.... ~..
;rot.. '9 ...........;. ~. ~
"',,''-ORA1,;, .~....~
............'"
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
(508) 228- 7230
6 Chestnut Street
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Meeting Minutes August 31, 1989 Page 20
and may require the submittal of any data deemed necessary by
the Commission for that evaluation.
5. This document shall be included in all construction contracts
and subcontracts dealing with the work proposed and shall
supersede other contract requirements.
6. Used petroleum products from the maintenance of equipment
shall be disposed of in a responsible manner off the site.
No on-site disposal of these items is allowed.
7. Any refuse material found on the site shall be disposed of at
an approved landfill and in no case will these materials be
buried or disposed of in or near a wetland.
8. This Order of Conditions shall apply to any successor in
interest or successor in control of the property.
9. No coastal engineering structure of any kind shall be
permitted on the property in the future to protect the
project allowed by this Order of Conditions.
UNDER THE MASSACHUSETTS WETLANDS PROTECTION ACT:
The project is approved as specified by the Notice of Intent and
all attachments, the most recent plans cited on Form 5, the
general and special conditions on Form 5, and the following
additional special conditions. However, if there is a conflict
between this Order and the application or plans, this Order shall
prevail.
3. If any material is to be permanently deposited at a site
other than the Town Landfill, the Commission must be notified
of this in writing before such material is deposited.
4. Members, employees, and agents of the Commission shall have
the right to enter and inspect the premises to evaluate
compliance with the conditions and performance standards
stated in this Order and the Wetlands Protection Act
Regulations and may require the submittal of any data deemed
necessary by the Commission for that evaluation.
'" ....."..II~
,.~~14TUeJr;"'~
Lr~ ~t'1-~~
~ ... ..
!~:~~\
._ ,.(J1.
It-."',,,~~_,. ~
I. . \, ~-'- '. 1 . <(
Tj........\~-...::.- -~-........~
'So.~" ~--~"'" .~"- ;:
,C'..... ~......A..ro~
~_O~::..........~. ~
~.I.;!.ORA1~ it""'"
............'".
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
(508) 228- 7230
6 Chestnut Street
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Meeting Minutes August 31, 1989 Page 21
5. This document shall be included in all construction contracts
and subcontracts dealing with the work proposed and shall
supersede other contract requirements.
6. Used petroleum products from the maintenance of equipment
shall be disposed of in a responsible manner off the 'site.
No on-site disposal of these items is allowed.
7. Any refuse material found on the site shall be disposed of at
an approved landfill and in no case will these materials be
buried or disposed of in or near a wetland.
8. This Order of Conditions shall apply to any successor in
interest or successor in control of the property.
9. Section 310 CMR 10.30 (3) of the Wetlands Regulations,
promulgated under MGL Chapter 131, Section 40, requires that
no coastal engineering structure, such as 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.
###
b. Annese - 26 Tennessee Avenue - SE48-561 (60.1.2-29,30)
Mr. Glen Wills comments that the proposed work will not
require any changes to the septic system and asks that the
clause making the project conditional on approval by Richard
Ray of any septic system be deleted from the Draft Order of
Conditions.
MOTION: To accept the Draft Order of Conditions with
the discussed change concerning the septic system was
made and seconded.
IN FAVOR: WASIERSKI, BORCHERT, CRANSTON
OPPOSED:
DUNN, DUNWIDDIE
ADDITIONAL SPECIAL CONDITIONS
.J .....',....~
!II":i~}lTUC ,~
lir~~ --tt~
~ 0 ~:S- '!
~ 1 \"p ...
._.~.U\;.
t'-" 'IJI~
t-+"" ~ ~1' i
· \~_==-- - ~"!.1::_
<~.. ~"- i
ore. ".....~--=--..........'O $
,O~p'''''''':'~' ~
~".'" 0 RA 1 ':.....,~
..........."..
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
(508) 228- 7230
6 Chestnut Street
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Meeting Minutes August 31, 1989 Page 22
ROCCO AND JEAN ANNESE
DEQE FILE NUMBER SE48 - 561
ASSESSOR'S MAP 60.1.2, PARCELS 29 & 30
26 TENNESSEE AVENUE
UNDER THE MASSACHUSETTS WETLANDS PROTECTION ACT
( MGL CHAPTER 131, SECTION 40 )
AND THE WETLANDS BYLAW OF THE TOWN OF NANTUCKET
( CHAPTER 136 )
UNDER THE NANTUCKET WETLANDS BYLAW:
The Commission hereby grants the applicant a waiver from Section
2.05(B)(5) of the Wetlands Protection Regulations of the Town of
Nantucket, under the Nantucket Wetlands Bylaw (Chapter 136).
This section requires a 25-foot natural, undisturbed area
adjacent to a coastal bank and prohibits non-water-dependent
structures within 50 feet of a coastal bank. However, there has
been a clear and convincing showing by the applicant that there
are no reasonable conditions or alternatives that would allow the
project to proceed in compliance with the regulations and that
the proposed project will not have any adverse effect upon any of
the interests protected by the Bylaw. This waiver is granted
under the authority of Section 1.03(F)(1)(a) of the Wetlands
Protection Regulations.
The project is approved as specified by the Notice of Intent and
all attachments, the most recent plans cited on Form 5, the
general and special conditions on Form 5, and the following
additional special conditions. However, if there is a conflict
between this Order and the application or plans, this Order shall
prevail.
3. The supports for the reconstructed second-floor deck must be
no further than 5 feet from the existing house. A maximum of
4 supports is allowed; they may be sonotubes. This condition
takes precedence over the approved plan.
4. Prior to any activity at the site, a siltation fence shall be
staked between the project site and the top of the bank, as
shown on the approved plan. The siltation fence, erected to
prevent erosion, filling, and littering of the bank and salt
. ......',.."~
,..~,..~TU el(;'~'
L<>r~~~
itl '"piS
-o:~,.\<c,i
I....i""'~i. i
I.. ~~~~~~i::~
~\ ~~","-I.A.. ;:
,....^... -'-'ft:=--=-- .' '0 ;:
.. "'0..... ....... ~
if._' ~^ .......,;,~. ~
-..,...',,-ORAlw it""
..........."".
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
(508) 228- 7230
6 Chestnut Street
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Meeting Minutes August 31, 1989 Page 23
marsh during construction, will also serve as a limit of
activity for work crews. It shall remain in good repair
during all phases of construction, and it shall not be
removed until all soils are stabilized and revegetated or
until permission to remove it is given by the Commission.
5. An as-built plan, signed and stamped by a registered
professional engineer or land surveyor in the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts, shall be submitted to the Commission at the
same time as a written request for a Certificate of
Compliance and shall specify how, if at all, the completed
plan differs from that shown on the plans referred to in the
Order of Conditions. The as-built shall include, but not be
limited to, the following: all pipe/culvert inverts for
inflow and outfalls; pipe slope, size and composition;
location of other drainage structures and their composition;
limits of fill or alteration; location of all structures and
pavement within 100 feet of wetland; the edge of the wetland;
the grade contours within 100 feet of the wetland.
6. Members, employees, and agents of the Commission shall have
the right to enter and inspect the premises to evaluate
compliance with the conditions and performance standards
stated in this Order and the Nantucket Wetlands Regulations
and may require the submittal of any data deemed necessary by
the Commission for that evaluation.
7. The applicant, owners, successors or assignees shall be
responsible for maintaining all on-site drainage structures
and outfalls, assuring the lasting integrity of vegetative
cover on the site and monitoring site activities so as to
prevent erosion, siltation, sedimentation, chemical
contamination or other detrimental impact to the on-site
wetland and/or off-site resource areas. It shall be the
responsibility of the property owner of record to see that
the maintenance conditions are complied with as required by
this order.
8. This document shall be included in all construction contracts
and subcontracts dealing with the work proposed and shall
supersede other contract requirements.
......,........~
,..~,..14TU eJr;'~'
""r~ ~~
~~ ~1-1.
!~; 1 ~Thi
tr:~~~_- '4:!- -t' :
.;-,,,,,~ -/..
~~-- - ~- ........
\~.. ~~"'"- '-^" ~
ll! "..... -'-'ft:=.....=--........,o ~
.,~O~p..........~. '"~
""'-,ORA1'" ........
--........,,,
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
(508) 228- 7230
6 Chestnut Street
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Meeting Minutes August 31, 1989 Page 24
9. Used petroleum products from the maintenance of construction
equipment, construction debris, and unused paint and paint-
related products shall be collected and disposed of
responsibly off the site. No on-site disposal of these items
is allowed.
10. Dust control, if required, shall be limited to water. No
salts or other wetting agents shall be used.
11. Any refuse material found on the site shall be disposed of at
an approved landfill and in no case will these materials be
buried or disposed of in or near a wetland.
12. This Order of Conditions shall apply to any successor in
interest or successor in control of the property.
13. No coastal engineering structure of any kind shall be
permitted on the property in the future to protect the
project allowed by this Order of Conditions.
UNDER THE MASSACHUSETTS WETLANDS PROTECTION ACT:
The project is approved as specified by the Notice of Intent and
all attachments, the most recent plans cited on Form 5, the
general and special conditions on Form 5, and the following
additional special conditions. However, if there is a conflict
between this Order and the application or plans, this Order shall
prevail.
3. The supports for the reconstructed second-floor deck must be
no further than 5 feet from the existing- house. A maximum of
4 supports is allowed; they may be sonotubes. This condition
takes precedence over the approved plan.
4. Prior to any activity at the site, a siltation fence shall be
staked between the project site and the top of the bank, as
shown on the approved plan. The siltation fence, erected to
prevent erosion, filling, and littering of the bank and salt
marsh during construction, will also serve as a limit of
activity for work crews. It shall remain in good repair
during all phases of construction, and it shall not be
.. &...-..
llTiiC'1.
l~~~-~)~
1ft '"P~
to:~\U\l
:_ - : U1 _
I-\.,,,,~~,. ..
.\4-~1::!
<~"~~1.;...1
'" C'..... -'-'ft:=--""" - ..........'0 ,i
"'....o~::.......... ~. ~..
..,~~ORA1~ ~..\...
............"".
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
(508) 228- 7230
6 Chestnut Street
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Meeting Minutes August 31, 1989 Page 25
removed until all soils are stabilized and revegetated or
until permission to remove it is given by the Commission.
5. An as-built plan, signed and stamped by a registered
professional engineer or land surveyor in the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts, shall be submitted to the Commission at the
same time as a written request for a Certificate of
Compliance and shall specify how, if at all, the completed
plan differs from that shown on the plans referred to in the
Order of Conditions. The as-built shall include, but not be
limited to, the following: all pipe/culvert inverts for
inflow and outfalls; pipe slope, size and composition;
location of other drainage structures and their composition;
limits of fill or alteration; location of all structures and
pavement within 100 feet of wetland; the edge of the wetland;
the grade contours within 100 feet of the wetland.
6. Members, employees, and agents of the Commission shall have
the right to enter and inspect the premises to evaluate
compliance with the conditions and performance standards
stated in this Order and the Wetlands Protection Act
Regulations and may require the submittal of any data deemed
necessary by the Commission for that evaluation.
7. The applicant, owners, successors or assignees shall be
responsible for maintaining all on-site drainage structures
and outfalls, assuring the lasting integrity of vegetative
cover on the site and monitoring site activities so as to
prevent erosion, siltation, sedimentation, chemical
contamination or other detrimental impact to the on-site
wetland and/or off-site resource areas. It shall be the
respons i b i 1 i ty of the proper ty owner of',record to see that
the maintenance conditions are complied with as required by
this order.
8. This document shall be included in all construction contracts
and subcontracts dealing with the work proposed and shall
supersede other contract requirements.
9. Used petroleum products from the maintenance of construction
equipment, construction debris, and unused paint and paint-
related products shall be collected and disposed of
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
(508) 228-7230
6 Chestnut Street
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Meeting Minutes August 31, 1989 Page 26
responsibly off the site.
is allowed.
No on-site disposal of these items
10. Dust control, if required, shall be limited to water. No
salts or other wetting agents shall be used.
11. Any refuse material found on the site shall be disposed of at
an approved landfill and in no case will these materials be
buried or disposed of in or near a wetland.
12. This Order of Conditions shall apply to any successor in
interest or successor in control of the property.
13. Section 310 CMR 10.30 (3) of the Wetlands Regulations,
promulgated under MGL Chapter 131, Section 40, requires that
no coastal engineering structure, such as 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.
###
3. OTHER BUSINESS
a. Sharp/Kilvert - SE48-548 Screening plan
Continued due to lack of representation and information.
Also, the staff is to write a letter requesting some
screening drawing to arrive soon.
b. Charles Gifford - SE48-525 (43-180> Minor Modification
Present for the applicant was Bruce Killen.
Mr. Killen comments that the footprint has changed
slightly from the approved plans.
Mr. Dunn asks if there is an overlay of the two
footprints. This was a very complicated application. It is
customary to get an overlay for a minor modification.
.. ~~.
. ~.......~
~ ~,..14TUeJr;~
~~~~~
If!. "'"Po:.
to:~\U\;,
L . itn!
1-:",." , _~ ~:. .
· \ ~_~ ~~ 1~ I
\~.. ~"- 1
.. C'..... -'-'ft:=.....=-. .......... '0 ~
"""o~P'''''''';'~' !Io4'
"",;.::ORA1-r:.......~~
---...."..
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
(508) 228- 7230
6 Chestnut Street
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Meeting Minutes August 31, 1989 Page 27
Mr. Wasierski comments that something has changed.
Mr. Borchert adds that the Commission should have an
overlay for its records.
MOTION: To continue the discussion and await the
receipt of plans showing the differences between the
approved and new footprint was made and seconded.
UNANIMOUS
c. Hempleman - Hulbert Avenue - Continued due to lack of
time at the request of the applicant's agent, John Shugrue.
d. Hawkes - Smith Point - done at beginning of meeting.
e. Meeting location - Move to High School on a trial
basis.
f. Warren's Landing - Peter commented that he will look
into a controlled burn of the area in the next month.
MOTION: TO ADJOURN THE MEETING WAS MADE AND SECONDED
UNANIMOUS
10:50 p.m.
~~~ ~~.f),tq~
Ft^t1'~ ~h{;h