HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-08-29
J"'
..r-'
:~i~::r~;:T':?,,~,';'f'
';'-'Y~j,'+':ft~3'~'V'_1lf~~~
""
II
Town of Nantucket
Conservation Commission
4 Nor1;hWater Street
N antueket.M assaehusetts 02654
MEETING MINUTES FOR AUGUST 29. 1991
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Large
Group Instruction Room of the Nantucket High School.
Commissioners pres~nt were William Willet, Laura Hussey, Peter
Dunwiddie, Diane McColl and Daniel Kelliher. Also present were
Bruce Perry, Administrator, and Lucia Wyeth, secretary.
A. COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS FROM PRESS AND PUBLIC
Airport Commission request for emergency dredging.
Present is Mr. Fred Yaeger~ Airport Manager. Mr. Yaeger
says they operate an occasional emergency pipeline at the
boat yard and over time it has been silting in. They believe
it has been accelerated by Bob. Coincidentally there are
some emergency dredging funds availabl~ from the state to be
able to correct that problem and they would like to be able
to develop a small, safe draft area at the end of the
pipeline so they will have adequate room to turn and be able
to move the tug in and out. At this point to be able tc do
it they have to be very careful; with some light dredging
they feel they can increase their margin of safety.
Mr. Willet asks what is the history of dredging in that
area.
M'r. Yaeger says he thinks it has been dredged quite a bit
in the past. He thinks the whole boat yard area was
devel~ped out of fill material th~t was dredged out of the
harbor many years ago. Doesn't think it. has been dredged for
a long, long time. There is almost a tide of sand coming out
of the creeks area.
Mr. Willet asks if he is making formal application at
this time.
Mr. Yaeger says he has received permission from the state
to do the dredging. It is a fast moving situation.
Mr. Willet asks if this is an emergency situation.
Mr. Yaeger says yes, they would do this under the
emergency provisions. Construction equipment will be i~ the
harbor sometime in the next couple of weeks doing some
salvage so they have a chance to get this done for an
extremely low pr1ceandfurthermore it would be payable under
iuftf ?- 'd3-fr m 6U ~('~(
I
,1.
y
Mee~ing Minutes for AUQ~st 29, 1991 Page 2
grants from the state~ They are talking about approximat ly
1500 yards. They plan to put the spoil at the end of run ay
24 where beach erosion has been pretty .severe. Theybeli ve
the nutrients from the spoil will probably help to revege ate
the area. All in all it'S. a short term emergency situati n
as well as a unique window of opportunity to get somethirg
done that will help them increase their safety in the hareor.
Mr. Willet asks Mr. Perry if this qualifies under the\
emergency order.
Mr. Perry says yes and no. He has just received the
Governor's Proclamation which came down fr"om Commissionet
Greenbaum on wha't isal16wed under the special regulations
under "Bob" up until September 30, 1991. One of the things
that is allowed for emergency certification is dredging to
open pre-existing chal"lrle1s. But it also goes on to say that
you are not allowed tci expand or do any work other than
reopen them. So what they are talking about, creating a
deeper, area so they can get the barge in and out does not-
qualifyunderemergencyc:ertification. They would only be
allowed to take any sand, if any, that was blown in as a
result of the hurricane.
Mr. Yaeger points out. the hurricane blew in from the
southeast, out of the creeks, into the mouth of the pipeline.
Mr. Willet asks if he has talked with the Marine
Department.
Ml-. Yaeger says he talked wi th Dave Franzuto and he had
no objection.
Dr. Dunwiddie asks if he has talked to SHAB.
Ms. M~CoJl ,asks if he has talked to Harbor Planning
Committee.
Mr . Yaeger says no; they got the story yes,terdayand .he
was told it was under our jurisdiction. Adds they will be
coordii1ating with Mr. Franzuto and others involved.
Mr. Perry points out the section in the Governor's
proclamation which specifies "dredging for the purpose of
reestablishing channels filled by the storm to the condition
on which they existed on August 18, 1991." Says he doesn't
see how this qualifies because one you don't know what the
conditions were previous to the storm and we don't know ~,,:iat
the conditions are now.
Mr. Kelliher says we have no parameters to go by.
t
,1.
1
Meeting Minutes for August 29, 1991 Page 3
I.Dr.... D..unwiddie says When. ,you. put inth~pipeliQettl~re had
to be bottom profiles of it.
J'.Mr.. p~rr.Ys~Ys h" th i. n, k..,S t,h " CORlm. i,. S.$i.,onneedS ~. !'.""" ". oa t
i is now before we approve a!"y dredg~ng.
Ms. McColl asks if there is time to do profiles before
tt\e dredg i ngequ ipment arrives.
!
Mr. Willet says depth comparisons for the next meeting
would be helpful.
I Mr. Perry states that there has been questions from the
beginning on the adequacy of depth in the area of the
pipel ine..
Mr. McColl says before you restore something you have to
see if it needs to be restored.
Mr. Kelliher notes that our next~eeting is in two weeJ<s.
Mr. Willet says if need be we could have an emergency
meeting but thinks we should have some data.
Mr. Yaeger says another way to approach it would be for
you to grant conditional permission that would allow Mr.
Perry to work with me and Mf"'.. Franzuto on the data gathering
that needs to be done and make a judgment on that and be able
to proceed.
:Ii
Mr. Willet says he thinks Mr. Perry should be involved
but repeats that we can pullan emergency meeting together
within 48 hours.
i."
.,'1
Ms. Creighton of the Nantucket Land Council says she
thinks it's good that we are requesting a comparison of data
as it will also show what the spoils contain. This is
significant since it is being brought to another resource
ar.ea. It's impol-tant to look at the sediment type.
Dr. Dunwiddie says he is a little unclear as to what the
emergency is right now. From what you told us it sounds to
me like the emergency is that there is equipment coming and
youwa1'lt to use it. I don't think that qualifies as an
emergency.
Mr. Yaeger says it isa number of things: an
unsatisfactory condition and an opportunity to solve it.
pro Dunwiddie says he would like better documentation
that the situation is unsatisfactory~ It was represented to
us three years ago that YQuhad to have this pipeline because
,~y~,:-,:,,\~~j_~;~';''!.'~!I'f.J~t:!f;;.,..' ";;';';;~i"ff~t,~;;~::'<"~,~ !'J~~,?;\\> - '.
,1,
Meeting Minutes for August 29, 1991 Page 4
it was an emergency. We finally concluded that it re,lly
wasn't an emergency then.
Mr. Yaeger says he would propose to work in a way. that we
would safeguard putting any undesirable material in the wrong
place and we would test to make sure there were no
contaminants there. This will give us a chance as a town to
solve a problem and to do it in the most economical way.
Adds he feels ~ery uncomfortable coming ~o us with no data
but the circumstances are such that that's all r have.
Ms. Creighton says no dredging is discussed in th~ FEIR
and it is a recognized shallow area tidal flat which does
seemtCl be something that needs to be addressed. . Not just in
an emergency situation.
t'
"
Mr. Yaeger says your group has made some severe
complaints about us operating in there in shallow water
conditions. We're trying to solve that condition. So now
are you 'going to say th~t we should not make any attempt to
product a. safe draft in there? After a hurricane has filled
it in.
Ms. Creighton says one of the issues is ~hatloc~tion is
perhaps not a choice of the commission because of the
shallowness of the area.
~
~,
+:'-,':1
Mr. Yaeger says we're not talking about a beginning here;
we're talking about reality as of today.
-(
f:
'~
C
I
Ms. Creighton says right, and to look at the pre-August
18 conditions and to understand what amount has filled in
that area since the hurricane to qualify for the emergency is
what needs to be done.
"
".:!
': .
Mr. Yaeger agreed to provide additional information to
the commission and the discussion was continued to the next
meeting.
l'
t'
\'
Fence installed at Esther's Island
Present is Mr. Roland Picard who fishes regularly in the
area. He reviews the changes in Es"ther's Island for the past
30 years and how access to Smith's Point has been affected.
Says Wednesday a fence appearedwhictt completely blocked
passage as it went down to low water. Asks if a permit isn't
necessary to put up a fence.
Mr. Willet asks if Mr. Arthur Reads has anything to say.
Mr. Reade reques~s a response be deferred until the owner
of the property, Mr. Hawkes, is present. Notes they are on
r
I '{I'
11
y
Meeting Minutes for August 29, 1991 Page 5
B.
th~ agenda to discuss their e/Jl.ergeoj:Y 'iequest later i.n the
eVening.. Ad,ds the fence was put up to I protect the house from
vandals until. it can be relocated. !
Mr. Kelliher asks M,r.. Picard if h~ can stay unt i 1 8: 30
Whe. n the oW,~.erw. ; 11 be here an'" we ca then d; scuss it with
all parties present.
\
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Richards -25 E. Tristram Ave.,- SE48-609 (31-1)
MOTI.QN: To continue the hearlng at the applicant's
requ~st is made and seconded.
UNANIMOUS
2. Diehl - 44 Meadowview Drive - SE48-656 - (56-297)
MOTIpN: To continue the hearing at the applicant's
request is made a,nd seconded.
Mr. Perry says Mr. EmaCk has received some comments from
DEP on the septic system and they are working on another
design for it. They weren't too happy with our suggestion.
UNANIMOUS
3. Reade - Polpis Road - (26~26.1)
Mr. Perry says we are waiting for a DEP number on this
one.
MOTION) To continue for a file number is made and
seconded.
UNANIMOUS
4. O'Neill - 98 Wauwinet Road - .SE48-:662 - (11-25)
Mr. Perry says they have requested a couple more weeks to
work with their architects.
MOTION.: To continue at the applicant's request is
made and seconded.
UNANIMOUS
5. Colbert - 35-37 Wanoma Way ~ SE48-661 -(92.4-312, 313)
Mr. Perry says we were waitin~. for comments from the
Natural Heritage people who respon<:lfE?~ that the project will
~3~<;..;~~ml\,~~Y~,1""'" :">~~~i:.~~L~~~,~';
11.
Meeting Minutes for August 29, 1991 Page 6
not affect ~he habitat. Adds the one porch is within the 50'
and requires a waiver. It is a covered porch but is not to
be enclosed. He has drafted an order and suggests the
hearing be closed.
MOTION: To close the hearing is made and seconded.
UNANIMOUS
* 6. Hoffman - 16 Tautemo Way -83-14
Present for the applicant is Glen Wills of Nantucket
Surveyors.
Mr. Perry says this is an after the fact filing on
Hummock Pond.
Mr. Willet reads the inspection report.
Mr. Perry saysth~re is vxposedbeach on either side of
the pier.
Dr. Dunwiddie asks where the pier falls during normal
water.
Mr. Perry says w~ter comes up to the first p~st.
Mr. Wills says there was previously a floating dock there
which ended up~own the beach in the spring if the water was
high enough. He has now l"'aised it. It is about 4' x 18'.
Dr. Dunwiddie says it's the biggest pier on the ~ond,
isn't it?
Mr. Wills responds that it's the same dock that was
there. All they did was put new stringers on either side to
attach it to the post.
Mr. Perry says the difference is that it's not floating
on the water. It does stay raised up and is more visible.
Mr. Wills says previously they used to pull it out of the
water in the fall and put it back in the spring. They felt
that did more damage than a fixed pier.
Dr. Dunwiddie says in his mind it is just such a
conspicuous thing and a floating dock is more usable just
because the pond is at a diffel-ent level every time you turn
around. Sometimes like now a dock is about as useful as an
albatross ~round ybur neck. To m~this is one more vis~al
incursion ~n the landscape that doesMJt seem particularly
..
Meeting Minutes for August 29, 199~ Page 7
necessary and we seem to have to live;with it because
somebody wanted it.
Mr. Kelliher feels it is better than something that goes
floating off every time the pond rises.
Dr. Dunwiddie feels that can be prevented.
Mr. Willet says it is the same size float with a c9uple
more posts in there. Asks if there is any more information
that we would require.
MOTION: To continue for a DEP file number is made
and seconded.
UNANIMOUS
*
7. Dunham - Tristam Avenue
31-02
>!'II
':~
. Presept for the applicant is Mr. David Haines of Haines
Hydrogeologic Consulting.
Mr. Perry says this was discussed in a
summer. It is an isolated depressior,.tha.t
plans and whether or not it .is a wetland"
filed a notice ~or the house construction.
determination last
shows uponithe
Mr. Haines has
t
,
Mr. Ha i nes says in the not ice they have providec:F a
c;jescription of the iSQlatedarea. They feel strongly that it
is not a vegetated wetland as defined by any of the by-laws
or the state regulations. Also included in the filing is the
proposed work that is within the 100' buffer zone to a'
vegetatedwetl~nd. Says the point of contention of the
previous deterlT,'ination is an isolated area that had been
recently brushcut.
},'
i"
f
t.
~~
Mr. Perry says the commlssionwent out to inspect it with
Dr. Lisa Standley. At :the time it was hard to tell as it had
just been brushcut.
Mr. Haines reviews what determines a.n area to be a
wetland. Says they have done a soil test hole down to about
3 1/2' where they otiserved no evidence of a high water table
or of standing water and they have. also watched it since last
fall and have never sE;?en any water in the hole. It is very
sandy and well drained; has a 2 minute perk rate. There is
also no. evidence of stclnding water on the surface, Le.
stained leaves. They also performed 3 plant plots to look at
the vegetation in the a.rea. One came up with a dominance of
sweet pepper bush, thE:! other two had species other than Sweet
Pepper Bush.
,"'0 ~~J'" ,';j;r?~,:,:';7~Y's~' :-</ L ,::~,,!!,:;,':f"}r$. ""::_Ij,,'";:,.,.,....'~,... ':.
,1,
y
MeetihgM~nutes for August 29, 1991 Page 8
,Dr. Dunwiddie asks what was the loc,tion of the plots.
Mr. Haines says one right next to tHe test pit and the
~~:e:n~~o~, e~i:~~' s'~: c7~.:h...: :i:ei.~:C ~,~~nt~~t.. S~:e:h~ e~:~;e:~~~n.
which qoes require a wetland to have it seeds force and then
in his ~pinion spreads into the uplandreas and it also
tends to dominate in an area that has b~en brushcut; othe-
species were present but not did not do~inate. Does not
feel, therefore, that it Usa very good wetland indicator
species even though it is ~isted in th~ act. With the la=k
of the wetland hydrology and the wetland soils and the ve~y
well drained nature of the sOils'and t~at there is no water
table near the land surface, he feels this area is not a
wetland. The elevation df the w~t~rtable that was
encountered in the test pits is approximately the samE
elevation as the marsh which is 3 1/2' below the surface.
The Army Corps of Engineers uses a depth of 18" for the cepth
of water to be at or near the surface.
I
~,
Dr. Dunwiddiv notes our water table is quite a bit dc~n
now; under normal coriditionswould be quite a bit higher.
:"
, Mr. Haines says there was a deep hole test done in lC;:~O
as opposed to 1991. There was no evidence in the soil of a
high water table either. Other than that in terms of a
bordering vegetated wetland there is a marsh bordered by a
shrub swamp. There isa distinct break in slope. A port~on
of the house and the well may be located within the 100'
buffer zone. They have provided an envelope but do not have
an exact house design at this time. The house will be
located gre?~er than 50'from the wetland and there will =e a
25' undistu~bed vegetated buffer alqng the edge of the
wetland. The only activity in most of the buffer zone would
be possibly landscaping.
Dr. Dunwiddie questions his redefining wetland criteria
so that it is no longer a wetland. Says there is over 5C~
cover of listed species and you said they tend to get sta-ted
in wetlands and move into uplands--where is the wetland t~ey
got started in?
Mr. Haines points out where they got started (edge of the
marsh) .
0,-. Dunwiddie says and they moved all the way up to he.-e?
Mr. Haines says yes. Continues it does say you have :~
have a wetland and then you define your boundary of the
wetland based on the vegetation. You have to have a wetl3.nd
hydrology and the vegetation. You have to have both and i""
you don't have a wetland hydrology then you don't have a
,1.
Meeting Mi.nutes for August 29, 1991 Page 9
wetland to start with. Sweet Pepper Bush is not an obligate
species it's a facultative'\I'Iet. It's.right on the pusp.of a
facultative and facultative.wet.
Mr. Perry says to clarif~Lit on the test pit he would
say the top foot of thete.t2~it ~he first couple of inches
is litter and the next S is heavy soil for Nantucket; it's
sandy but it's dark. If you were to buy a truckload for
Nantucket it would be called loam. Below that layer it's
almost beach sand. Feels the top layer is holding enough
water to allow the Sweet pepper to grow so you might have
standing water for the first foot and once it get's through
there it's gone. Thinks it's a little more borderline on the
hydrology. Agrees from lS"t03 1/~' it's dry sand but the
first foot is heavy for Nantucket.
Mr. Haines says there is no evidence of standing water on
the surface.
Mtl
~'?:.
Dr. Dunwiddie says it could be perched groun~ water.
Mr. Haines says to be perched.the upper 8-12" of top soil
would show some evidence of ~~turation on the surface. This
is not a saturated soil.
MI-. Perry says he. ten(j? to. <ilg1"'ee .
pecu I at i ng so il . And that' S enCJ~gh on
species to grow. Believes if there is
should look at it agai~.
It's more of a slow
Nantucket for wetland
enough question we
Commissioners agree to look at it the next morning with
Mr. Haines.
MOTION: To continue the hearing for additional
information and a file number is made and seconded.
UNANIMOUS
c. REGULAR MEETING
1. REQUEST FOR DETERMINATION
a. Arnold - 127 Wauwinet Road - (12-6 8. 7)
MI-.. Perry says the app I icant f.a.11ed to noti fy the
abutters.
MOTrON: To continue the hearing is mClde and
seconded.
UNANIMOUS
'>.:i.';" ~;;;,::r~,J~;i.iii.~W"';::':,{;:; ~':;f!~~~~.~:t~,~'t~~c:':~:
11.
~~
Meeting Minutes for August 29, 1,991 Page 10
*
b. Weinman - 5 Woodbury Lane, Lot 12 - 41-55f
I
Present for the applicant is Mr. Glenn Wills {' f Nantucket
Surveyors.
Mr. Willet reads the inspection report.
Mr. Perry says Mr~ Wi llsiflaggedthesite and\he would
say it is a conservativ~'flag9ing.-forthf:!! bottom 'of this
retention area. A berm would caechany'water' an~ direct it
into the Woodburydrain.One,o-f the restriction$ of the lot
i:- that they .don' tchange the flows of the waterr. the berm
wlll help prevent that..' ,
MOTION: To issue a n~gativedetermiriation subject to
but will not alter is ~ade~nd ~econded.
UNANIMOUS
*
c. Frazier"" 88 &.90 Baxter Rd - 49-05, 06
Mr. Perr~ says we have not received abutter notificatic~.
MOTION: To continue the hearing is made and
seconded
UNANIMOUS
2. ORDER OF CONDITIONS
."
a. Newquist - 8-10 Fargo Way - SE48-660 - (14-15 & 61)
Pr~sent for the applicant is Mr. Les Smith of Daylor
Consulting and Attorney Arthur Reade.
Mr.'Smith says they have reviewed the draft and find it'
accep ta~le.
MOTION: T6 issue the order as drafted i. made and
seconded.
~.
Dr. Dunwiddis asks do we know that chromatic copper
ars~nate is preferable to creosote?
Mr. Perry says the state doesnrt allow creosote to be
used. The wording is standard.
Commissioners discuss and consider "limiting to only
untreated materials" or "tolerated".
Attorney Reade suggests "tolerated in the spirit of
Ii ber a I ism. II
..
l
i}
.,
<',. ---.._'"~,,~. ....,.~.._-.__._-........._~"'"..;.-~~~~..;.,,-,.__.~...__.......-........
..
y
,
Meeting Minutes for August 29, 1991 Page 11
I
\
Mr. Wi llet asks for addi t ional comm~nts and, if none, fer
a vote.
UNANIMOUS
ADDITIONAl.. SPECIAl.. CONDITIONS
Scott and A~l~""~qUist
DEP,FIl..r=:.NUMBER13El.tE;J'7660
ASSESSOR'S ttAP.14,.:~MCEl; IS & 61
a ~ 10 Fa...~...;~..y...
UNDER THE MASSACHUSETT~ WETl;A"'J}$ PROTECTION ACT
( MGL CHAPTER 131 ,SECT ION 40 ). ,
AND THE WETLANDS BYLAW OF THi5TD,. OF' NANTUCKET
<CHAPTER 1361"
3. Pursuant to General Condition Number 8, this Order of
Conditions must be registered in the Registrye:of Deeds for
Nantuck~t and proof of recording shClllbe"sulJp'i tted to the
Commission, prior to commencememt of any work. approved in
this Order. '
4. No work approved under this Order shall take pl,ace until all
administrative appeal period$ from the Order have elapsed,
or, if an appeal has been filed, until all proceedings have
~ been c6mpleted.
5. An as-built plan, signed and stamped by a registered
prdfessional 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 the final approved plan. Tf:le as-built plan
shall include, but not be limited to, the fol~owing: any
pipe/culvert inverts for inflow cmd outfalls;:"pipe slope,
size and composition; location of other drainage structures
and their composition; limits of fill or alte~ation; 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 Cindperformance standards
stated in this Order, the Nantucket Wetlands Bylaw, the
Regulations promulgated under thel3ylaw, the Massachusetts
Wetlands Protection Act. and pertinent Massachusetts
regGlations (310 CMR 10.00 through 10~99). The Commission
may require the submittal of any data deemed.necessary by the
Commission for that evaluation.
t
"l
11.
Meeting Minutes for August 29, 1991 ..Page 12
7. The app licant-, Owners,. st.!ccessors,or assignees shall be
responsible for maintaiping any 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,siltatiqns sedimenta~ion, chemical
contamination or other detrimental impact to anyon-site or
off-site resource area. It shall be the responsibility of
the property o~ner 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 deal~ng with the work proposed and shall
supersede other contract requirements.
9. Used petroleum products from the maintenance of construction
equipment, constructiond~bris, andun~sed paint and paint- ;
relatedprqducts shalt be collected and disposedaf
responsibly off the site. No on-site disposal of these items
is allowed.
10:. Dust control, ifrequirE!d, shall be limited to water. No
!Salts qr other wetting agents shall be used.
ll..Any refuse material found on the site shall be disposed of at
an approved landfill and in no case may 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. Natural vegetat ion between the wet land edge and the prqj~:ct
site shall be left intact except wher-e it is necessary tp
temporarily use this area. After construction, any distu'rbed,
area within this buffer area shall be replanted with natdve .
plants as described in "Attachment A" to the Notice of
Intent.
14. To minimize adverse effects on wildlif"e, the use .of any
pesticide or fertilizer more than 15 feet from the house is
prohibited.
15. The use of timber pressure treated .with CCA. (c;:romatedcopper
arsenate) or its equivalent is permitted. Creosote treated
timbers are prohibited. The wood preservative must be dry
before the treated wood is used in construction.
16. No coastal engineering structure of any kind shall be
pel-m it tad on the proper t Y' in the fu tur E to pro tec t the
project allowed by this Order. Section 310 CMR'10.30 <3> of
the Wetlands Regulations, promulgated under MGL Chapter 131,
See t ion 40, requ ires tha t .no coastal engi neer i ng struc ture,
such as bulkhead, revetment, or seawall, shall be permitted
....._,._._ c _",.,~_,,_,,'~'~."""" __............~.__.......h;..'.........__...~. ...-0., __ _. ""'_'___ ~.,
,1,
,.
Meeting Mihutes for August 29, 1991 Page 13
on ~n eroding bank at any time in the f~ture to protect the
project allo~ed by this Qrcler'of Conditilons.
###
b. Craig - 1 Kimball Ave~ue
SE48t659
appr,ved
~
- (30-33)
Mr. Perry notes this order was
hearing but not signed.
at the last
ADDITIONAL SPECIAL CONDITIONS
Earl M. Craig, :Jr. i
DEP FILE NUMBERSE4B - .XXX
ASSESSOR'S.MAP 30, PARCElL 33
1 Kifftbal Avenue
UNDER" THE MASSACHLJS~TTS WETLANDS. PROTECTION ACT
( MGL CHAf'TER 131, SECT I ON 40 )
AND THE WETLANDS BYLAW ,OF THE TOWN OF NANTtJCKET
( CHAPTER 136 )
3. Pursuant to General Condition Number 8, thisOr'der of
, Condi tiohsmust be reg istered in the" Reg istry of Deeds far
Nantucket and proof of recording shall"besubmi~ted to the
Commission, prior to commencement of any work appFoved in
this Order.
4. No work appraved under, this Order shall take plc';lC::~ until all
administrative appeal periods from the Order ha~~::elapsed,
or, if an appeal has been filed, until all proc~edings have
been completed~ ~
"
~{~
5.
r
Members, employees, and agents of the Commissifrh shan have
the right to enter and inspect the premises to'evaluate
compl iance with the conditions and performance 'standards
stated in this Order, the Nantucket Wetlands By).aw, the
Regulations promulgated under the Bylaw, the Ma,ssachusetts
Wetlands Protection Act, ,and pertinent Massachul,setts
regulations (310 CMR 10.00 through 10.99). The'Commission
may require the submittal of any data deemed nefessary by the
Commission for that evaluation. '
6. The applicant, owners, successors or assignees shall be
responsible for maintaining anyon-site drainage structures
andautfalls, assuringth~ lasting integrity of: vegetative
COver on the site and monitoring site activities sa as to
prevent erosion, silta.tion, sedimentation, chemical
contamination or other detrimental impact to anyon-site or
off-site resource area. 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.
llj
i.'1
"
.'
"""}':'"'~~~~~--',;' ~~~~'~,.
,1,
Meeting Minutes for August 29, 1991 Page 14
7. This document shall be included in all construction contracts
and subcontracts dealing with the work proposed and shall
supersede other contract requirements.
8. Used petroleum products from the maintenance of construction
equipment, construction debris, and unused paint and paint-
related products shall b~ collected and disposed of
responsibly off the site. No on-site disposal of these items
is allowed~
9. Dust control , if required, shall be I imi tedto water. No
salts or other wetting agents shall be used.
10. Any refuse material found on the site shall be disposed of at
an .approved landfill and in no case may these materials be
buried or disposed of in or near a wetland.
11. This Order of Conditions shall apply to any successor in
interest or successor in control of the property.
12. All work approved under this Order shall be done by hand. No
heavy machinery is allowed on the beach.
13. Natural vegetation between the wetland edge and the project
site shall be left intact.
14. To minimize adverse effects on wildlife, the use of any
pesticide or fertilizer more than 15 feet from the house is
prohibited.
15. The use of timber pressur~ treated with CCA (croffiated copper
arsenate) or its gquivalerit is permitted. Creosote treated
timbers ~re prohibited. The wood pre~ervative must be dry
before the treated wood is used in construction.
16. The final approved plans allow the walkway and stairway width
to be four (4) feet wide.
17. To allow sunlight to penetrate, the separation between the
planks on the boardwalk shall be a minimum of three-fourths
of an inch - 3/4".
18. The stairs and walkway shall,be' removed from the beach and
bank area in the winter or when the house is to be
uninhabited.
19. No coastal engineering structure of any kind shall be
permitted on the .prapel-ty in the future to protect the
project allowed by thi.s Order. Section 310 CMR 10.30(3) of
the Wetlands Regu,l at ions ,promulgated underMGLChapter 131,
Section 40, requires that 'no coastal engineer'ingstructure.
such as bulkhead, revetment, or seawall, shall be permittee
.
11.
i'
Meeting Minutes for August 29, 1991 Page 15
on an er-oding bank at any time i,? the future to protect the
'pr-oject allowed by this Order of/Conditions.
I
c. Colbert- 35~37 wan,,::#wat -. SE4B~bbl -(92.4-312. 313>
I
Mr. Perry reviews several chrngeS to the drafted order.
I
Mr. Emack que.stion$ #15 rreraarding natural vegetation.
Asks if' they are' allowed to put fa lawn between the porch and
the line of haybales.
I
Commi.$sionersagree the, lewd may be planted.
Dr. Dunwiddie asks the first word be eliminated on #:9
and replaced with "both lots."
MOTION: To issue the order as drafted and modified
iSffiade and seconded.
UNANIMOUS
ADDITIONAL SPECIAL CONDITIONS
John and Cheryl Colbert
DEP FILENUM$a:;RSE4EJ -661
ASSESSOR'S MAP 92~'f}.PARCEL 312 8. 313
35~37.Wanocnc1l<Way
UNDER THE MASSACHUSE...,..S",ETLANDS PROTECTION ACT
( . MGL CHAPTER.J;~l,'SECT:.J ON 4() )
AND THE WETLANDS BVl.AW'()F THE TOWN,OF NANTUCKET
( CHAPTER 136 )
" 3. Pursuant to General Cohdition Number 8, this Order of
Conditions must be registered in the Registry of Deeds fer
Nantucket and proof of recording shall be submitted to tne
Commission, prior to commencement of any work approved in
this Order.
4. No work approved under this Order shall take place until all
administra.tiveappealperiods from the Order have elapse,::!,
~ or, if an appeal has been filed, until all proceedings have
been completed.
5. Prior to any activity at the site, a snow fence shall be
staked along the line a.s sho""fn on the final approved pla~5.
or at a higher elevation. After the fence or haybales are
installed"notice.shcdl be.given to. the Nantucket
Con~ervation.Commission. No work shall begin on the site for
48 hours,.after sCii.d notice isgi ven, so as. to allow
CoftilRissionm.embers t ieneto, inspect a.J 1 siltation devices .
The snow fence erected to prevent ~r~sion, filling, of tre
11.
\
Meeting Minutes fo~ August 29, 1991 Page 16
I
wet I and dUl- i ng construct ion, wi II als.o serve as al imi t 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.
i
\
6. 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 asa written request for a Certificate of
Compliance and shall specify how, if at.all, the completed
plan differs from the final approved plan. The as-built plan
shall include, but not be limited toithe following: any
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 ~'>Jet I and.
7. Members, employees, and agents of the Commission shall hav:
the' right to enter and inspect the premises to evaluate
compliance with the conditions andpE!rformancestandards
stated in this Order, the Nantucket Wetlands Bylaw, the
Regulptions promulgated under the Bylaw, the Massachusetts
Wetlands Protection Act, and pertinent Massachusetts
regulations (310 CMR 10.00 through 10.99). The Commissior
may require the submittal of any data deemed necessary by the
Commission for that evaluation.
8. The applicant, owners, successors or assigrleesshall be
responsible for maintaining anyon-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
coMtamination or other detrimental impact to anyon-site c-
off-site resource area. It shall be the responsibility 0'"
the property owner of record to see that the maintenance
conditions are complied with as required by this order.
9. This document shall be included in all construction contra~ts
and subcontracts dealing with the work proposed and shall
supersede other contract requirements.
10. 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 1:2~5
is allowed.
11. Dust control, if required, shall be limited to water. No
salts or other wetting agents shall be used.
11.
y
Meeting Minutes for August 29, 1991 Page 17
12. Any refuse material found on the site shall be'dispotied of at
an approvedlandfi11 and in no casE! may these materials be
buried 01'" disposed of in or near a.wetland.
,
I
\
13. This Order of Conditions shall apply to any successor in
interest or successor in control of the property.
14. With the exception of a portion of the covered porch and the
single story addition over the existing deck, no part of any
structure, including decks, .approved under this Order may be
closer than 50 feet from the top Of the bank.
15. Natural vegetation between the wetland edge and the'project
site shall be left intactexcep~ where it is necess.r~to
temporar:ily use this area. After construction, any Clisturbed
area within this buffer area shall be replanted with native
plants. There must be a 25-foot undisturbed buffer zone on
the upl~nd side of the wetland boundary~
16. To minimize adverse effect. on wildlife, the use of any
pesticide or fertilizer more than 15 feet from the house is
prohibited.
17. The use of timber pressure treated wi th CCA (crom!3ted c.opper
arsenate) or--i ts equ ivalent is perm! tted. Creosote treated
timbers are prohibited. The wood preservative must be dry
before the treated wood is used in construction.
,.;.,
-~
,
18. The proposed coveredpo~ch on the southern side of the
addition shall not be enclosed nor used as a living space.
This Condition shall be on~going and not expire at the
issuance of a Certificate of Compliance.
19. Both Lot 24 and Lot 25 shall be lirnitedto one dwelling for
both lots. No secondary dwelling<s) shall be permitted.
This Condition shall be on-going and not expire at the
issuance of a Certif~cateofCompliance.
20. The re-designed septic leaching facility shall be located at
least 100 feet from the top of the coastal bank as delineated
on the final approved plans.
21. No coastal engineering s;truc;:ture of any kind shall be
permitted .onthe propertYiinthe future to protec;:t the
project allowed by this,()r:dE!r. Section 310 CMR 10.30 (3) of
the Wetlands Regulatioh~,,<promulgated under MGL Chapter 131,
Section 40, requires thclt no coastal engineering structure,
such as bulkhead, revetment, or seawall, shall be permitted
on an eroding bank at;il.,?ytime in the future to protect the
protect allowed by this Ofder of Conditions.
~;~fil:;~"!i;Y>::"';~~fif"'~~J3'~, ;;;~~'iJ&~wj~':';';;J'l.i;4;,~';;f
11.
'\
Meetinq Minutes for August 29, 199J Page 18
WAIVER UNDER THE NANTUCKETWETI..~NDS BVLAW: I
The Commission hereby,grants~hE7,'a~~licant a ~aiver Trot Section
~~~~~~~~~: ~~d:~et~:t~:i~:M~~o:~i~~d7c~:~~~~t~~2~.OfT~7~ :~:~i~~
~:~~~ r:s 5~:~~~~u::~b::~c~'r~~e.an~:a:~:~r~:~~~nd~~:r:~0~:\~ n~~ ~: at
section would apply to the a portion proposed covered pprch and
.the single story addition over the footprint of the exi'\;ting ,deck
as shown on the f i na 1 .. approved .'. plan. However, there h~s been a
clear and convincing showing by the applicant that there are no
reasonable conditions or alternatives that ~ould allow the
project to proceed in compliance with the regulations ~nd that
the porch and addition will, as conditioned above, result in no
adverse effect upon any qf't?e<interests protected by the.Bylaw.
Therefore, these waivers are granted under the authority of
Sections 1.03<FHl) and i.03(F)(2)(a) and (d) of the Wetlands
Protection Regulations.
###
3. CERTIFICATE OF COIWiPLlANCt::
a. Woodbury Lane - SE48-312 - (41-543)
Present for the applicant is Ms. Renee Ceeley of Woodbury
Lane Realty Trust and Leo Asadoorian.
Ms. Ceeley says they are looking for some direction and
hope to put the old order of conditions, which has expired,
to bed. Believe they have done a good job in the
rep l,i cat ion. Has heard Mr. Perry's comments after the recent
field inspection and is interested in hearing Dr. Dunwiddie's
comments.
-:i
Dr. Dunwiddie says the concerns he expressed at the last
meetihg were. one, that the wetland replicatioY'larea hadn't
been looked .B,t since 1988 and accord i ng to the, Order of
Conditions it needed to be looked at several times after
that. To his delight and surprise he thinks it is 'probably
in better condition than before. There are lot of things
growing out there that weren't previously and they are mostly
wetland species. The other thing that he expressed concern
about was the water quality reports that had been supplied to
us and he has reviewed them as well as he could. He went
through them with the original order in hand and his
admittedly fuzzy recollection as to what we were trying to do
when we requested them. The order requested 3 baseline water
samples from some source.
Ms. Ceeley says it was th~Liberty Street drain and
basically they studied a puddle. It was a drain that was
above gradient on Lot 11; confirms it was not anything coming
I
,1,
\
Meeting Minutes for August 29, 1991. Page 19
~..~, : ~:..:h:.h:. e:~~::~ / 'i~ I ~., ~:,... t.,b.i.J ~;.:. t:....~ o~!/~~.. t w:~~:~~~..i"i~~..t
~~seline dat~ represented ~ndth~re'ore wh~t the test
Y. mparisons proved. The drairrwa~ basically a sumpth.at
llects rUT1-off from thE;! street. . .
· Dr. Dunwiddjesavs m..vbe .~h~V. were colle<;ted from the
~rong place., To my recollection the intent of what was to be
c;'ollected was what was coming out o.f YOl,lr site that w~s going
on to Lily Pond as we were conCE;'rl1ed the activity on your
$ite would not affect Lily Pond. Asks if nothing from your
site goes to the Lily Pond?
I
Ms. Ceeley says it used to go.throl.Jghaclaypipe that
ran through Pertell's property. ~eviewsplans andpoil1ts out
the existing drain from which the tes,ts were taken. That was
the only drain that went directly to Liberty Street. Notes
these are the conditions prior to construction.
Dr. Dunwiddie asks nothing coming Gut of here was ever
sampled?
Mr. Asadoorian says prior to construction all the water
went through the basin through a series of pipes into the
catch basin on No. Liberty Street.
Dr. Dunwiddie says and that's where the samples were
taken?
Ms. Ceeley says no, they were taken from Liberty Street.
Dr. Dunw,iddie says and after construction the water went
this way and you still weren't sampling from that?
Ms. Ceeley says no, ,they were. Then they asked for
permission not to test from there any more because-i t,made- ..,--
absolutely no sense because all thewa.ter that was gathering
irlthisdrain only comes from a portion of Lot 12, abutting
properties, and Lot 11" and possibly from No. Liberty. But
it wasn't represE;!ntative of the activity that was happening
at Woodbury~ which troubled me, and which is why I came back
to you and ~aid let's test from. here. I started. testing
there the end of 1987 but it wasn't base line. Shows where
the ba~e liMe tests were taken.
Dr. Dunwiddie says that isn't very useful.
Ms. Ceeley asts, hOWEver, what he thought of the test
results.
Dr. Dunwiddie says he saw a problem and was surprised it
wasn't addressed. The phosphate~.arld nitrates were within
''''f"'!\l{'~';"r:~~?'':1,~~:j~l,;:C~/'::<-~/!f~';''''"!11'''rf,;g~y;'S~_:::'~
11
Meeting Minutes for August 29, 1991 Page 20
the average of the baseline, but the fecal coliform were far
higher. Says the basel ine CInes had none in them. Everv
single one of your post-construction samples had significant
amounts.
Ms. Ceeley points out where those tests were from. Says
the reason the coliform count went up is because the area is
the dog-walking capital,of the island. That's why they said
the test doesn't .ake any sense.
Ms. Ceeley and Dr. Dunwiddie discuss the baseline
numbers. Dr. Dunwiddie points out that if any test shows an
excess of any pollutant greater than 25X of the established
baseline standard the applicant will take steps to reduce the
levels of pollutants.
Ms. Ceeley asks the mean or the range. We had to do
three samples.
Dr. Ounwiddie says the average usually means the mean.
The mean is .5 'and every single one of these values is 20,
30.
Ms. Ceeley says that's 20 colonies compared to drindng
water standards which allows up to 200,000.
Dr. Dunwiddiesays he is reading from the Order and
you've got several orders of magnitude of higher values. And
you say there's no difference? What are you saying, these
numbers are totally meaningless?
Ms. Ceeley says she thinks the sampling is totally
meaningless.
Dr. Dunwiddie says it's a fine time to bring it up five
years later.
Ms. Ceeley says they brought it up in 1988 and then you
still had us continue testing.
Dr. Dunwiddie says we didn't get any copies of these
tests till a couple of weeks ago. You had ~hem for several
years. If they were meaningless why didn't you tell us.
Ms. Ceeley says that's not true. You've had the '87 and
the '88 and '89 and '90 are the one's you received late.
Dr. Dunwi ddie notes the fou.r l-epo. ts ai-e stamped J _~ I' 31,
1991. We just got them. Repeats his question, why are these
are several orders of magnitude higher than the mean?
I
,1,
'\
Meeting Minutes for August 29, 1991 Page 21
Ms. C~eley says the fecal coliform comes 1rom what--
can I
you tell' the audience?
I
::: ::::::d::y:a::1 s::~:::' concl~de from Ithat is kat
~~:tw:~ ~~~dt~:~~~~e i~ tt~~r~:~ toj~a:oW~;d~ i:~c~:s~~j~ i :71~7 i fe -
habitat. Where else could it posslply be'coming-from?
Dr. Dunwiddie says people walking their dogs. Leadng
sept~c systems. Unknown sources. i
Ms. Ceeley says there were no septic systems related to
thissubdivisi~n.
Dr. Dunwiddie says leaking sewer lines?
"
Mr. Perry says it could drain from the septic systems of
abutters.
Ms. Ceeley says how dowetorrect that?
Mr. Perry says what,he's asking you is to justify ~~is
order of magni tude difference,.
Ms. Ceeleysays if you look also at the waterqual~ty
results, they fluctuate. One minute there's a 20 coli':orm
count, the next it's below 1. Be it rainwater conditicns,
natural corditions, the population of wildlife in the
wetland. How can we justify that when it's unrelated to any
activity on this property?
Dr. Dunwiddie says the baseline samples didn't jumc
around. It was 0, 0 and 1. All I asked was for some
explanation. Now you're asking me to explain it.
Mr. Wi llet s.ays he thinks we can request ,this
information; we don't have to iSsue a certificate until we
get that.
Ms. Ceeley says she would like a reason why they were
required tp.do a water CjU.ality test; nO one else has had to
do a water quality test in their wetl~nd. Thinks if you were
to go down to Lily Pond or. any other place you are go i rg to
find counts that are just mind-boggling. And that are going
to fluctuate. It's just a natural explanation.
Dr. Dunwiddie says why didn't the baseline jump all
arouncj as you say.
1'-
nJ#l,:;~""~G~,^~Yi~'H;'.~',J-'::":~~~~t,."
11.
-:'~
Meeting Minutes for August 29, 1991 Page 22
Ms. Ceeley says she doesn't know ",hat the baseline meant.
Mr. Willet asks Dr. Dunwiddie if ~e had anything else.
!
Dr. Dunwiddie says no. (
Dr. Dunwiddie says the data was requested so that there
"ou 1 d be no i mpac t on t.he L jJ Y Pond. . And you're say i ng the
data show there might be a impact but we don't know why.
What are we here for? Why do we wri~e orders if we're just
going to ignore the results?
Mr. Willet asks Ms. Ceeley to tr~ put an explanation
together.
Ms. McColl suggests to p~ove the coliform is not coming
from the sewer lines perhaps they could do a dye test. They
you can say it is not coming from leaking sewage. If the
sewer system is not leaking perhaps it's from some other
source. This would ease. Dr. Dunwiddie'smind that it wasn't
the sewer systen:l then perhaps it is coming from wildlife or
dogs or sept ic sys.t~ms that. you have no contro lover. Th inks
th~ most.serious place leaking coliform could be coming from
is a leaking sewer system.
Ms. Ceeley says that's a great suggestion and she'll be
happy to do that.
Mr. Willet asks for Ms. Ceeley's approval to continue.
Ms. Ceeley gives her approval
MOTION: To continu.e at the applicant's request is
made and seconded.
UNANIMOUS
b. Kaye - Top Gale Lane
SE48-305 - 27-7
Mr. Perry says this is one of two filings for Mr. Kaye's
house. The old file was to build the house and the new file,
to bui ld a tennis cour t.
Mr. Willet reads the inspection report which recommends
the certificate be issued.
MOTION: To issue the Certificate of Compliance is
made and seconded.
UNANIMOUS
c. Cranberry - Wes~Ehes~e~ St.- SE48-425 (41-227)
.
_.-,.___;....,...._...'._._c"...,;,:..;.;...J.....'....:.. ,;~......~_..;'-'"-'-.....~~~'........,,--._;:..._;.r....__ ,_.~.~_.._r..;.,... ~.-.:...:......,_.._. ,__ . _.-> _',...,... .~,..".:... ';~_'_".:;
11,
Meeting Minute$ for Augu$t 29, 1991 Page 23
Present for theapplicantar~f'1t". David Haines of Haines
Hydrogeologic Consultingan~A~torney Foley Vaughan. Present
for abutter Grillo is Attorney P~terFenn.
Mr. Willet reads the field inspec:::tionreport which
questions the size of thereplication.reas ~nd also the
wetland species. Also notfi!.'$ the unapproved ,car tut"naround
may affect the adJacent ~etl.nds. More time may be needed to
allow for further growth.
Mr. Perry says we received ,a copy ofa letter to Peter
Fenn from Susan Trull commentinQ on the field inspection.
~;~<
Mr. Haines says they have requested a Certificate of
Compliance and along withtherEeque.st is a letter describing
how they feel the project substantiallycompl ies with the
Order of Conditions with a few exceptions: the quantity of
f i 11 for the dri vewayi s s I ightXY less than what they
proposed; the replication c1lt"eas is less than what was
proposed; and there is a driveway tl.1rnaround adjacent to a
wetland area that was put in that was not part of the
original Notice or part of the Order. Replication area Rl is
exactly as shown on the plan and has .come in very well. R2
is smaller than proposed mainly<to avoid the destruction .of 2
mature trees, a cherry and an c1lpple,and a mature hedge,
which, if it were removed, would put the replication area in
someone's back lawn. Ther. a~equestions about the success
of the replication area. They feel that it more than
satisfies the 75% indigenous cover and that it does contain
50% wetland species. The. wetland was constructed at the
grade of the adjacent wetland areas as proposed in the
Notice. However, since construction, a pipe under the
driveway that drained the area was crushed and the drainage
in the area was disturbed. During the replication process an
accurate water level in the replication area was not observed
and it was about a foot to a foot and one half higher. The
drainage problem at the site had been brought to their
attention by a number of people, including a neighbor whc was
experiencing excess water in his back yard. They did some
research and discovered a pipe which was replaced and the
area has sincedTained in ~he preconstruction manner. Also
the end line of the pipe h.as been cleaned out so the whole
system probably drains better now than it has for the last 10
- 15 years and the whole wetland system may experience a
slightly dryer condition than it has in the past. The
we~lands might shrink and he is a l.ittle concerned but the
pipe also has to be maintained to preserve the drainage. The
driveway turnaround is not causing any impacts.
Mr.. Perry says if the R2replication area is a foot too
hiClh. how is that connected"to the .:irli~r,..nt: 1Al,..t:l~nrl
".',!~:,j>"'~5"/!l':;.~t-~~,";! ;':'~ "':~~~~:;~<;::\"..,\
..
y
Meeting Minutes ~or August 29, 1991 Page 24
Attorney Peter Fenn shows a set of photos taken in April
of the Gril.lo'sback yard.
I
I
~
Mr. Haines says it does drain downto the ~amewetland
area and it is still adjacent to thesamt;!wetland area. It
is hydrologically connected. Points out the grades that were
matched.
Mr. Haines says in response to th.is condition we
discovered and located a pipe and replaced 'it.
'I~
;.>
Attorney Fenn says this condition may have been
alleviated by the discovery of the pip,.'but they aretn't
certain. Th~ir consultants, Horsley Witten and Hegemann,
noted a few problems. One is that one of the replicated
wetlands really is not a wetland._ It may turn into a wetland
or may go back to being upland. This is the one that is a
foot higher and is 'perhaps hydrologically connected. One of
their problems is that they keep finding things out after the
fact. When the project was started they mowed the Grillo's
back yard meadow by mistake. Now theyf1.ooded the baCk yard.
Then they find this pipe they didn't know.w.asthere. And now
they say that pipe is going to drain i~ and will continue to
and it will be dryer. He thinks it's premature to give a
Certificate-of Compliance. We don't know whether that area
is going to be a replicated wetland. We know it's smaller
than it was supposed to have been. We don't know what's
going to happen next spring. There's been no provision to
maintain that pipe. To keep the end clear. What happens
overtime if use of that driveway breaks it again. Or if it
does not in fact drain the site. Given that is a bordering
vegetated wetland that is now being drained by a pipe, thinks
the board should require a new Notice of Intent specifying
that pipe, what it does, ~hatthe hydrology of the site
really is, .where it's going and what provision will be made
for the future to insure this does not become a public
nuisance. At a minimum at least one more growing seascn and
one more spring to see what that replicated wetland does.
Whether in fact in becomes a wetland, whether it's big
enough, where the water goes. We don't have enough of a data
base at this time as to whether this project complies ~ith
the act, whether the original Notice was sufficient ana
what's really going on at the site. Most of the stuff looks
pretty good but overall ther~ are too many questions.
"
;~
,":'1
Mr. Haines says they feel the crushed pipe was the
problem and they repaired the situation. Thesituatic~
exists now as it has in the past, probably in the late 30's.
The pipe has. not been maintained since Cranberry owned the
property because they didn't know about it. When they did
the original filing they looked extensively for an out:et to
.
,1,
y
Mee~ingMinutf&S for August 29, 1991 Page 25
that system. They.hive tt-iEld very h;ird to maintainth~ . .
hydrology of the Sl tjEf. T~ere are no records of that plpelY1
~~:~~;:} ~.;~:~~:~~~;{:;;!!~~~~!~~:~t;~g~~~:: !~: 7!f~:::f~:t
Attorney Vaughan\says from the evidence he has seen the
pipe begins on Cranb~rrY'sproperty and goes underneath and
across a couple of o;ther properties and ends up in a catch
basi n down the road.1 We can't contro I the other end.
There's a ditch to the left of the property that was closed
off some years ago. I He thinks it is clear it was the source
of the dr.inageand he understands the water was down in two
days once the pipe was fixed and he's going to continue to
maintain it.
Dr. DUY1widdie says he
the field inspection that
of the neighbor's houses.
gets blocked. Is anybody
thinks it was represented to us at
this pipe probably goes under one
What happens if somehow that pipe
obli9atedto do anything?
Attorney Vaughan says that's a real problem. If you could
source the problem and if for instance one of the parties
were to decide he didn't want it running under their property
and blocked it off, you would have an action against that
person. But we wouldn't have any control over him today as
we sit here. It's been like that for fifty years.
,
\~:
~
Attorney Finn says there may be some kind of prescriptive
easement or an adverse possession type of easement but their
problem here is that until last year they didn't have a
problem. Now they have built roads through this wetland. It
mayor may not have diverted flow in ways it wasn't diverted
before. They said they unblocked this old pipe that we
didn't know was there and have solved the problem. We say at
least go through another growing season to see if YOIJ did
solve the problem. If this order had come in with a pipe the
board would have done something about that pipe and where the
water goes. Now that we know it's there we should resolve
the situation. I am amazed that you can do a hydrogeological
analysis of a site and a replication and not know where the
water goes.
Mr. Willet questions Mr. Haines about Horsley Witten's
statement that there is a loss of approximately 877 sq. ft.
of wetland on the project site.
Mr. Haines says it was in an area that had been
prf&viouslymapped asa wetland in the form'of a swale
that had been incorporated into our replication area.
subtract that area out arid we've taken'tbat area down
and
If you
by a
z1't'3;~::~~~;r~~.:'5:"~; . ~,~2,;~~'V'rf~.~~~trm~'
,1,
Meeting Minutes for August 29, 1991 =:age 26
foot and we're still saying it isn't a wetland and mayce it
wasn' ta wetland tosta;rt with but by a very conservat:. '/e
interpretation at that time it was considered tobea
wetland. We've taken that area down by approximately :. foot
and included it irtthe replication area. I haven't re=.:me
the calculations after this was pointed out to us.
Dr. Dunwiddiefiays if I just walked into it I woulan't
call it a wetland. I didn't feel there was over 50%c~ver of
wetland species which is the criteria I generally use~ There
are w,etland species there but it is borderline but I wal;.dd
have to add immediately that Mr. Haines is right that -;he
wetlands immediately adjacent to that are also very
borderline and I'm not sure in terms of the overall
composition that the replication area is significantly
differen1; from the wetland right next to it. It may c=
different than what wCis. to be replicated since those a-eas
were by enlarge somewhat wetter than what's immediatel~
adjacent to it. I never have great faith in the SUCCESS of
most wetland replication to begin with, so I guess I'cr not
particularly surprised that this doesn't strongly represent a
wetland. But I'm also not too inclined that if we make you
dig it up and start alL over that we will end up with
anything better than wha~ we've got now. If you've gc-; the
elevation and the topography similar to what's around -;nere,
I'm not convinced that you're going to do much better~
Mr. Haines says we could go down another foot.
Dr. Dunwiddie says and end up with a pond. His
inclination would be to follow what Horsley Witten
recommendation was and to just wait another year and see what
the vegetation does. Then make a decision based on that
before we tear the place up again.
Attorney Finn says we're not advocating it be dug _0
again right now. Or that it should be expanded. We l:i<e the
mature vegetation and think it should be saved. We'd like to
see though whether the hydrology of the site effectivel!
functions through one more hopefully wet spring.
Mr. Haines says as the board has pointed out this -as
been a dry year. If the board were to wait for anothe-
growing seCison I would like the commission to leave us the
option to just take it down and dig it up.
Mr. Willet says that option is still open under tHe order
of conditions.
Dr. Dunwiddie makes a motion that we hold off iSSu.lng a
Certificate of Compliance for one more yeal- until we see whCit
goes on.
I
,
Meeting Minutes for August 29, 1991 Page 27
are
I
I
!
Mrs. Hussey asks if the motion includes the turn-around-- i(
we accepting that? .
~
I
Attorney Fen~ offers to prbvid~ a set of photos for the
file.
Mr. Willet says we have made no comment on the turn-
around yet.
Mr. Haines asks if we cou~d make a list of thin~s why you I
do not feel it compli~s so that we can satisfy that list.
Attorney Vaughan says!"le. has~' t really got'ten a sense
that you feel it doesn't comply. My sense is that you wan!-_
to see a growing season but that basically the status quo--and
a year from now the water is flOwing, the trees are budding
and wedQn't have any more hurricanes that pretty much we
have complied. I don 'tget a s~nse from.the board that there
Is any rea L p rob I emo ther than the Issues that have been
ralsedabout the flowage.
Mr. Perry says he thinks there isa problem. R2 is right
now a borderline wetland., It' can go either way. We want to
see if it's going to become'an upland ne>ct year or become a
more--. we 11 es tab I i shed wet land..
Attorney Vaughan asks if you will know at the end of a
growing season whether It's an upland or not.
Mr. Perry says ir no wetland plants come back then yes
but it won't become an upland in one year.
Attorney Fenn asks if it is the sense of the commission
that the,pipe might become such an issue that you would want
more Information. It seems it would be a good idea to solve
the problem now.
Mr. Willet says it seems to him you can solve a small
part of the problem perhaps but down the line you can't
resolve today.
Dr. bunwiddie says Attorney Fenn's point is well taken in
that if thiswer:e the Cgc:nmp:ps we'd be falling allover
ourselves trying to strai.~tii;~T'l out this whole business of the
pipe now completely. It's.not a major development that's
trashing an entire wE.'tlal1d.'
Attorney Fennsays b';'fj; it is affecting Mrs. Grillo.
Would. suggest anagrE.'ellle6.~ ~ither byprder of Conditions or
privately to maintaintl1~;pipe and the drain area. You
could seek an easement from the people under whose house it
y
_~~;1~'ll'r.-,!'.w<~f.:,t;(:,::',;" >";~~~'JI.~~'..".
..' _...., '..,J' "~~_',,,_.., .... "'.'_""'__'~
,1,
1
Meeting Minu~es for August 29, 1991 Page 28
goes and make, sure you have bOlth the ab i I i ty and ob I iga t ion
to keep the pipe open and flo~ing.
Attorney Vaughan says he oesn't think it's up to the
commission to do that.
Mr. Perry says under the rder of conditions there are no
special conditions so we can' put anything on the
Certifica~e o~CoMplianee tha implies it's on-going that's
not in the order. We can'"t spy as an on-going condition to
the Certificate of Compliancel you will maintain the pipe.
Under this notice we can't require they maintain the pipe.
I
Attorney Vaughan says if he has to resort to law then he
has to resort to law. This thing has been working for 40-50
years. He adds it has been fixed and it's working fine.
Let's not blow the thing out of proportion. We're happy to
wait for another growing season to see if the hydrology works
out.
Attorney Fenn says.he believes we should review after the
wet spring whether the pipe is even functioning. Contends
the original Notice was not effective because it consisted of
plans to alter a wetland but did not deal with a critical
point of the site which is where the water goes. He believes
if the board cares to assert it, it has jurisdiction.
Mr. Willet says he thinks he's probably right.
u
Mr. Haines says when they filed the Notice they assumed
it had an outlet and said at the time they could not locate
that outlet. The outlet was a very small hole in a lot of
brush and with no easement or record of that pipe; they made
every effort to find that pipe. And since they filed as a
bordering vegetated wetland he feels they have done nothing
in the process that hasn't been accurate. They have met the
performance standards.
Or. Dunwiddie.ays given our concerns with maintaining
the integrity of these wetlands we need to be concerned that
the wetlands are g6ing to remain in reasonable condition. If
the pipe starts functioning so well that the wetlands start
turning into uplands I'm not sure that's serving our purposes
any more than turning the neighbor's lot into a pond. My
concerns are as much the other way as what you're trying to
represent. I would like to know a year from now that the
wetlands aren't getting any smaller as well as the Grillo's
yard hasn't turned into a duck pond again. Do we have enough
baseline information on the composition and the boundaries of
that wetland that a year from now we will be able to make
some determination as to whether that wetland has gotten any
smaller?
.
11
Meeting Mtnutes for August 29, 1991 Page 29
..
Mr. Perry says we don ' t ha\;.e any information on the
wetland delineation on the @rillo'a property. Suggests they
filea Determination to delin.ate it and we could look at
next year; some of the ar-,ea that was ponding is on the
Grillo's property and some on Cranberry's.
Mr. FennsaY$ as a v9lt..mtary measure we would be glad to
present that data both to Mr. Haines'and to the board as an
aid to provide that possible evaluCition and if Mr. Haines
thinks it is different--he is not trying to lock it in.
Dr. Dunwiddie says he think~. that would be a valuable
piece of informat ion at .thispoint.
Mr. Haines says if Mr. Grillo is paying for it, we could
do it with the commission, go out and examine the site. Adds
the thing is all we've done is reestablish a d,-ainage system
that was there before and we feel it will continue to drain
as , it has in the past. As J'1r..Perry pointed out, there is a-
berm that separate!:) the pipe from the wetland on the Grillo
property that thewaterha~toflow thr.:ough the entire
wetlands system and around the berm and back up into the
pipe. The elevationofth~p;.i.pe has not been changed. There
was an opening in the pipe in the hole. The only thing we've
done is to clean out the pipe.
Attorney Fenn says this action may potentially alter the
wetland. The roads May also. affect the pipe over time. Is
satisfied with the boarej'ss.:iying let's take another spring
and then come back and talk 'about it.
Dr. Dunwiddie asks if we want to do anything about the
turnaround.
Ms. McColl suggests a minor modification request.
Mr. Perry agrees and adds,itneeds to be vegetated on the,
wetland side; he can see themeed for it, otherwise they
would have to back all the way around the driveway.
Mr. Haine!:) says he wOLlld like to know how the commission
feels about the size of the replicated wetland.
Dl-. Dunwiddie says he has not seen a clear tabulation of
exactly the $quare footage that wa$ filled in the different
areas, the exact square footage of the total wetlands on the
site, the exact square foo tage of the wet land rep 1 i ca t ion
areas you did create so I can $ee a nice balance sheet of how
it all comes out.
.'~'''ij;~~1.~k,'T')'.; ~Jf~~~"f""'~
.~
,1,
Meeting Minutes for August 29, 1991 Pag~ 30
Mr. Pe~ry suggests they could provide that information
when they come in for their e>:tension request.
MorlaN: To continue the hearing for additional
information is made and seconded.
Ms. Creighton of the Land Council asks if the motion
could be amended Trom the one year growing season to ~e a
growing season of to-year average rainfall.
Dr. Dunwiddie says he appreciates th~ intention b~t
thinks that is putting an unreasonable burden on the
applicant at this point.
Mr. Kelliher says he keeps records of rainfall and will
provide that information.
Jr.
.:... .
;,
1
Mr. Perry says we don't want to continue the discussion
on the compliance; you w~nt to deny the request for
compliance for reasons t"at we want more information on the
replication area and that it needs more time to grow.
Attorney Vaughan suggests we continue until we get the
information and at that time you can vote on the request for
extension.
Mr. Perry notes we have to act within 21 days~ suggests
we deny the COC and act on the extension request at the next
meeting.
Mr. Kelliher says he withdraws his previous motic~ and
makes a motion we deny the Certificate of Compliance.
MOTION: To deny the Certificate of Compliance is
made and seconded.
,<
."",
f:'
f
UNANIMOUS
Mr. Perry says in his denial letter he will requEst
additional information.
Attorney Vaughan asks confirmation. the commission is
denying based on your~e~ire to see another year of growing
of the replication area rather .than sp~cifically saying the
replication area is too small.
Dr. Dunwiddie says that's correct~ and try to provide
those numbers in t~e meantime.
d. Kaye - Top Gale Lane - SE48-567 - 27-7
,1,
\
Meeting Minutes for August 29, 1991 Page 31
Mr. ;Perry says this ilS one of two filing~ for Mr. Kaye's
house. The old file to build the house and !the new file to
build a tennis court.
MOTION: To issue the Certificate
made and seconded.
i
thiCh recommends
o~ Compliance is
,
Mr. Willet reads the inspection report
the certificate be issued.
UNANIMOUS
e. Ferrone - Coffin Road - SE48-266 - ~1-39
Mr. Perry says this is another old filing.
Mr. Wi lletreads the inspection report.
MOTION: To issue the Certificate of Compliance is
made and seconded.
UNANIMOUS
f. , Old North Wharf - SE48-489 .... 42.3.1-225
MOTION: To continue at the applicant's requ~st is
made and seconded.
UNANIMOUS
g. Sherman"" Squam Road - SE4S'....335 (21-120>
MOTION:, To continue at the applicant's request is
made and seconded~
UNANIMOUS
h. DPW, Si.sconset Wastewater Treatment .... SE48-381
Present for the applicant is Jeff Willett.
Mr. Perry says he went out with Norm Landman to both
sites and both are well planted and vegetated. Notes the
beach has acreted back about 60' in the past year.
MOTION: To issue the Certificate of ,Compliance is
made and seconded.
UNANIMOUS
i. DPW, Surfside Sewer -' SE48-380
y
"~'..'1'",---~.-~:-
11.
Meeting Minutes for August 29, 1991 Page 32
Present for the applicant is Jeff Willett.
Mr. Perry says he went out with Norm Landman to both
sites and both are well planted and vegetated.
MOTION: To issue the Certificate of Compliance is
made and seconded.
UNANIMOUS
4. EXTENSION
a. K&B Realty Trust - Crooked Lane ~ SE48-469 - (41-203)
Present for the applicant is Attorney Arthur Reade.
Mr. Perry says this is a three lot subdivision off
Crooked Lane which was filed before the local regulations
came into effect and was" approved afterwards. It went
through a superseding ordE?rJ they made a small change and
then we changed our order-to reflect the state order.
Mr. Reade says the sewer connection has been the problem
in that DEP criticized the common practice on Nantucket of
running the sewer line down a public street. The question
was raised as to whether they were going to be able to run
the sewer line in the str-.eet without putting in a larger line
that would sel~ve other houses in the area and if so they were
going to have to deal with a sewer extension permit. Daylor
has been working on it with DEP and they have finally decided
to file for a sewer extension permit and that it is pending.
Obviously the whole process got held up fora long period of
time. They realized this summer that the State's superseding
order- was about to run out and they immediately filed a
request for an exten~ion. They are still waiting for the
sewer extension permit. Under the circumstances of that
whole background they would like to ask for a year's
extension.
MOTION:
To grant the extension is made and seconded.
Mr. Perry says there are two problems. We received the
request for the extension on the day it expired so
procedurally the regulations itate the request should be made
in a timely manner; according to the state, 30 days is
timely. The second problem is there is virtually no setbac~
in the middle house to the wetland and the other two, half of
the houses are within 50' of the wetland. Adds this is a new
local regulation since the application was filed.
Dr. Dunwiddiesays this is why we have time limits on
permits to accommodate new information and changes. This is
..",___,"-" ..1..,
II,
Meeting Minutes for August 29, 1991 Page 33
sGbstantial if they are qoing to get rid 6f the septic
systems. These are just envelopes, they aren't foo'tprints.
I wbuld like to see footprInts without the septic s~$tems.
Mr. Perry says they may want to go to 2BA and discuss
front yard setback reductions and do some rearranging of the
envelopes.
Mr. Reade says the point is that not being able to get
the sewer connection permits from the DEP together with the
moratorium the result was the applicant had a substantial
period of time after they had closed on the property and that
they were really holding the bag and still are until they get
the extension permit.
Mr. Perry asks Ms. McColl if the moratorium is up.
Ms. McColl says it is ~till in effect but they (DEP) have
enough flow to connect just about every buildable lot there
is. A:t this time the state is still taking a longtime to
process $ewer extension permits. Adds the original
moratorium did hold them up.
Mr. Willet says this isn't litigation but it is a
restriction.
Dr. Dunwiddie says what we're requesting the applicant
isn' tnecessarily getting anything less than what he got
before, we're just asking it be relocated.
Ms. McColl says it will probably still take several
months and she thinks they would have time to do a new Notice
of Intent and footprints outside of the 50' boundary.
Mr. Perry says also more detail on the size of pipe and
where it is actually going to go.
Ms. McColl says 1 1/4" 'service lines coming out of the
house is very small; most lines are nqw at least 2" if not
4".
~
Commissioners discuss wi.th Mr. Read,e whether to require a
new notice be filed or to update the existing plan.
Commissioners withdraw the previous motion and make a
motion to deny the reque~t.
MOTION: To deny the extension request is made and
seconded.
UNANIMOUS
~"-/"",;'~: _"T'f-",>;j;-'Y:1'i\.:''''}.\:'::i5.?J'.eQ_~~:r;,r:.'''j';~':;.-'''''t~;l
11
y
, Meeting Minutes for August 29, 1991 Page 34
Mr. Reade asts if he should file under both state and
local; h~ has nq~ received a response from the state
rega:::n:e::: :J::::::nh:e::::t~or both.
b. CliffsiJle Beach- 26 Jeffer'son Ave. - SE48-499 (30-44)
Mr. Perry sJys they have started the project. Theyare
moving some buiJdings and tearing some down arid ~ep~acrnq
them. Reviews the status of work and says he was told that
most of the rempining work to complete is away from the
water, behind tbe buildings.
MOTION: To grant the e,.:tension request is made and
seconded.
UNANIMOUS
c. DPW, MadaketDitch -,SE48-427
Present for the applicant is Jeff Willett.
Mr. Perry states that the Commission has already approved
the change to open bo)( culverts from wooden bridges.
Mr. Willet says they open the bids on September 4.
Construction should be done by November.
MOTION: To grant the extension is made and seconded.
UNANIMOUS
d. Mitchell - Valley View Drive - SE48-428 ~ (67-228.1)
Ms. Mitchell presents her plans. Notes this will be the
second extension. N~thing is changed in terms from what they
want to do. The wetland line from the edge of the deck is
43', from the house is 48' from the closest point. Notes
they are not going to use the septic because they can now'tie
into the town sewer.
Dr. Dunwiddie says in that case the house can be,pulled
back.
Ms. Mitchell agrees she can pull the house back in order
to stay back 50'. Asks if she can still have the deck.
Mr. Perry suggests the deck can be not closer than 42' to
the wetland. That would give her an 8' deck.
,..,..:.'-o...-'~'.~ _"'___..' ,~.-,,_ ...""...._.,;-'--.~_____. ...,_~____~__ _',__ ._'" _,.. ..;..___ ..._,,-~_~.._,-,,~
11.
Meeting Minutes for August 29, 1991 Page 35
Commissioners agY"ee the house should be set back .at least;
50' and the deck 42'.
MOTION: To grant an extension subject to the agreed'
on setbacks is made .and seconded.
UNANIMOUS
5. OTHER BUSINESS
a. Hawkes - emergency request
Present for the applicant is Attorney Arthur Reade and
AgehtPhilip Marks. Also present is Mr. James Hawkes.
Attorney Reade summarizes the situation. Mr. Hawkes'
house on Smith's Point suffered repairable but extensive
damage as a result of Hurricane Bob. Pictures are presented
whi~h shows his house swept off it's foundaticin. The
existing loc.ation is one that is subject to flood damage and
they feel the location is not a sound one and Mr. Hawkes
would like to secure the permits on as much of an emer"gency
basis .as possibly in ordter. 1;0 relocate the house to a safer
and a more environmental.ly suitable location on his property.
They have asked the commission issue some sort of emergency
reI ief to enable them to star,t work on-the foundat ion wi thout
going through the full Noti~~ ~f Intent process~
Mr. Perry reviews the Greenbaum's temporary emergency
regulations which was just faxed to us. He thinks it doesn't
allow the commission to grant an exception under Hurricane
Bob's emergency regulations. Reads as follows: "Activities
not requiring emergency certification or the filing of a
Notice of Intent" (which means you can go ahead and do this
work without even getting permission from the commission>
"repair but not expansion of any building or foundation whe:e
the work is limited to the footprint of the structure which
existed on August 18, 1991, and where the damage is less tha'i
50% of the pre-storm,market value of the structure." So
wher"e you're proposing to move the house to a different
location, you're not working on the existing footprint. The
second point it makes is that "repair shal~ not be allowed
under this sub-paragraph i~ the effects of the storm require
'replacement of a septic system or a well."
Attorney Reade says he does not want to pursue the poin:,
of asking for emergency r~Ii~fexcessively. They believe~
however, that it is an emer'gency situation and he would li"e
to suggest they file a Noti'ce of Intent for the next meetirg,
possibly without as much back-up as they normally would have
.at the time of filing; simp~y a general sketch of the prese,...,t
locat ion and where they Prqe~.~e tg"J%?;.Yf..~' it. Meanwh i Ie Jeff
:<:;;~i~1">:'~' ~,","" i ,:"5,,7'.'-.:0:7. ",~,:,
11
y
Meeting Minut~s for August 29, 1991 Page 36
Blackwell is working on a pl~n [for the Notice and also for
the. septic system fortheB(:rarA of Health that they would
expect to have for the meeting,;after that. They would like
to get it done as quick I y a!i:i p!!i:i,!i:iibl~ as the possi b i I i ty of
another storm exists.
Mr. Marks reviews thesi ~e pJa1jl ;~.u th, the commissioners.
Says they would hope to move i to a safer area for the time
being and leave it On thetrai era
".
An abutting neighbor (Mr.iDl.1chey ?> of Mr. Hawkes says
Hurricane Bob created a situation right back of Mr. Hawkes'
house~ He feels it wouldtak~ a lot less than a hurricane to
further damage the houSeun)..ess ther,l;i! is pretty prompt acticn
taken.
Mr. Willet asks for a motion to put the house on a
tred ler and move it till they get the permi ts and then fi Ie e
notice for the next meeting.
MOTION: To allow the house to be placed on a traile;
and moved to a temporary location is made and
seconded.
UNANIMOUS
The discussion continues with Mr. Reade explaining the
reason the fencing was put up. First there has been some
vandalism to the house and this was to prevent access. Also
the condition of the beach as a reault of the ~torm is
fragi Ie and they have a c;oncern about vehicular traffic ove:-
the beach at this time.
t<'
Mr. Marks says the materials u,sed were from the snow
fence which blew down during the storm and they felt it was
necessary to keep people from driving around the house and C~
the beach grass and breaking down the dune. Says they had
one break in and also found someone taking shingles off the
house one afternoon. Adds thfs is only a temporary measure
until the house is moved.
Mr. Willet says he can understand but asks nr. Reade if
you can take it right down to the surf and block it off.
Mr. Reade says the public has beach rights below mean low
tide mark for fishing, fouling and navigation; however,
through the intertidal zone it does belong to him and
anything above the high tide mark the upland owner has a
right to obstruct paSsage.
Mr. Perry says if the intent is to keep people from
driving up the bank ~e would think it would be better to ru-
,1,
Meeting Mioutes for August 29, 1991
Page
it along the top of what used to be the bank and is now
filled in with sand.
Mr. Roland Picard, a regular fisherman, says the tire
tracks that go down to Smi~h's Point are 100' away from the
house; suggests the fence ~ould go up .on the high knoll. Say:
he never saw anyone driving near the house.
Mr. Hawkes says two years ago they did break down the
dune; this year drivers have C.OMe close to it and after the
hurricane at high tide there was no space for a vehicle to g=
by except over the dune.
Mr. Willet asks Mr. Reade if the fence has gone beyond
his property rights.
M~. Reade says no, his understanding of the fence from
Mr. Marks is that it is entirely ~nMr. Hawkes' property.
Mr. Picard contends the beach is not owned by Mr. Hawkes.
Dr. Dunwiddie asks Mr. Reade to explain the legal nature
of owning beach.
Mr. Reade says when you own land that is bounded by the
water you OWl'") to mean low "'ICilter line wherever that i-s. If
one day you own at one point and another day it erodes in one
foot, you don't own below mean low water mark and therefore
you own less land. The next storm builds up the beach, you
own back out. If at any time the. parcel of upland is
entirely gone as a result of storms and the next storm bring:
back the sand and the land is back, the original owner
doesn't own it any more. As long as some of it is still
there, the laws of acretiQr:land erosion result in him owning
to that line. The area where the issue is more difficult is
determining the side line$ where you have an irregular shore
line. As he understands it, Mr. Hawkes had a piece of
property, it eroded, built back up, he owns to the water
Ii ne, wherever that water 1 i ne is, i nc Iud i ng the beach that
everyone drives over.
Mr. Perry presents his solution that if the fence w~re
run lengthwise down the former bank it would keep the people
from driving on it and would ease the worries of the people
who were being blocked froM going out to Smith's Point.
Notes again this condition will-only be until the building i:
moved so in two weeks hopefully it will all be a moot point.
Mr. Marks points out that the existing fence is only
temporary for a couple or three weeks and Mr. Hawkes has
given up his landfor years and years. Says, however, he
will move the fence if thecQmmission requires it. Says
~. ^._,-."""........~,......h._.. ..,lot....!'/" '\.s.__""""".~,..-."
:""-~-',- "-~~;'-;J:-"WT:~-{l :'_~:~'A"'I"~iil"""~'T~~"''':~~..:'
11.
Meeting Minutes for August 29, 1991 Page 38
people will drive up there if they;goout to the point at low
tide and the tide comes in, as it i~ the. onLy way to get
back. Does not think it'sa5iking too much to leave it where
it is for a couple of weekS.
Mr. Marks says yes, 'except the town owns a pi~ce on the
end.
I
\
Mr. Picard asks if he owns right down to the end of
Smith's Point.
Mr. Picard says how do we get to that.
Mr. Marks says walk, take a boat. It's only 100 yards.
Is not a lot to ask for a couple of' weeks.
Mr. Marks says he will move the fence before the weekend
is over.
b. Beach traffic -discussion
c
Crozier - SE48-649 - (60.3.1-139-145)
minor mod.
Present for the applicant is Mr. Chris Holland,
Architect.
Mr. Perry says we have a letter from Mr. Holland
requesting a minor modification to construct a garage where
the dog pen is and which is more suitable than the original
plan of adding a second story.
Mr. Holland says this is a deletion o~the second story
which was approved to the existing house. It reduce~ the
plan down to a single car garage and storage area connected
to the house. It is about 50X of the footprint previously
requested. There are no problems with setbacks and the
roofline is at the lowest level of the existing lowest line.
Mr. Perry reviews: is about 65' away from the dunes at
it's closest point. We have limited footprint expansions at
Smith's Point; this does expand the footprint for the garage.
Dr. Dunwiddie asks what is different from what we've
approved.
Mr. Perry says they are not doing the second ~tory and
the garage was a ~arage al1d a bedroom and it has been reduced
to nothing more than 452 sq. ftsingle story garage/storage
area.
Dr. Dunwiddie says sO that'~ an add on over what we did
approvl;!.'.
11.
y
~eeting Minutes for August 29, 1991 Page 39
Mr. Holland s~~s over what you did approve, footprint
expansion, horizo' tal instead of vertical.
Mr. Perry say he J s }:'l9:t,:.!~ sure we can grant it as a
minor mod. The e isting Conditions specifically limit
horizontal expans on.
Mr. Willet sa~s he thinks it's pretty major, not that he
has any realtrou~r~withit but procedurally maybe we could
get into some leg~l difficulty for a minor modificati~n of
this magnitude.
I
Mr. Perry says they could advertise to amend the Order of
Conditions instead of~oing a new notice. Continues, in
order to do it as a minor mod we would have to eliminate 2
conditions.
d. Anapol ,- discussion
Mr. Perry says At;torney Leddy sent a letter by taxi to
the commissibnhere tonight ~hich said they had engaqed Mr.
Champoux to prepare astabili~ing replanting plan for the
property. The plan will be,.t;.eady for our review around
September 15.
Present is abutter Mr. s[ ichsen'. Says both before the
storm and after the storm there has been considerable
movement of sand. Provides photos. Reviews the situation
again and states conditions are worse since the last meeting.
Would like the board to make a determination if anyone has a
right to bulldoze the dunes.
Dr. Dunwiddie asks Mr. Perry his opinion; if what he is
doing is in accord with our original otder.
Mr. Perry says there are two points. First he was
allowed to have a driveway and to maintain it. Back in 1982
orders were only good fo~ 1 year. The catch is he never
performed this activity during that one year the order was in
effect. Therefore does he have the right to have any on'""'
going condition for iton the Certificate of Compliance. How
can you maintain an activ1ty that was never done.
Dr. Dunwiddie says he'"i,s bothered with on-going orders
that don't ever let us change our mind.
Mr. Perry says part of the discussion is when they came
before the commission in June requesting access to his
property and after doing SOme research the commission decidea
that he needed to have ac~essto his property and alltiwed him
to go through the dunes ..,~~~""",,,,,",,,,
,'~~:,~,r"-:"':,,f,,,, 7,r' C ..-.,.
11,
Meeting Minutes for f\ugust 29, 1991 Page 40
Mr. Erichsen says the state even has regulations
pertaining to primary dunes. This is a primary dune.
Mr. Willet says he doesn't think we quite understood the
whole situation but we have a little better understanding
now. Perhaps we should take a look at that road again.
Commissioners agree to schedule for the next field
inspection and to inform Mr. Leddy when they will be out and
that they will expect to have the restoration plan by the
September 12 meeting.
Mr. Willet adds we will also look.at the access he has
out there and the alternatives to determine a course of
action as what's going on is not good and there may be some
validity to the point he never did the work and it expired
and Dr. Dunwiddie's point that we are strapped with these on-
going conditions forever and a day.
e. Taylor - 61 Hulbert Ave. SE48~626 (29-10) minor mod
Mr. Perry shows a photo of a support for a heat pump they
would like to install ~utside the approved building envelope
for the garage apartment.
MOTION: To grant as a minor modification lS made and
seconded.
UNANIMOUS
f. Sesachacha Pond - vehicular traffic.
Mr. JefLWillett asked that this be added to the agenda.
At la.ii-'t> night's Selectmen's meeting they discussed limiting
vehicular traffic around the margins of Sesachacha Pond.
Proposes leaving two accesses on Polpis Road open for people
to launch their boats but put in a series of posts
perpendicular to the water to prohibit people from traveling
left or right.
Dr. Dunwiddie expresses concern that when the water rises
the posts will b~come a navigation hazard. He also comments
that the access along the east side of the pond is fairly
steep and if it is continually used as an access that the
potential for erosion into the pond is increased.
Mr. Perry says they may want to start tomorrow and has
suggested they file an after the fact Request for
Determination.
,1,
y
Meeting Minutes for AlJgust 29, 1991 Page 41
Mr~ Willet agrees a~d says that he will consider
alte,-antives to blocking the accesses.
6.
CORRESPONDENCE
Placementj
\
Commissioners discuss m.terial to ba used and
7.
MINUTES: for August 15, 1991
The minutes were not approved as the draft was
incomplete.
8. BILLS TO BE PAID
9. FIELD INSPECTIONS: Monday, Sep~e~per 9, 1991, 4:00
The meeting was adjourned at 10:27 p.m.