Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-10-18 Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission (508) 228- 7230 6 Chestnut Street Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 MEETING MINUTES FOR OCTOBER 18. 1990 The meeting was called to order at 7:05 PM in the Large Group Instruction Room of the Nantucket High School. Commissioners present were William Willet, Peter Wilson, Peter Dunwiddie, Laura Hussey and Dan Kelliher. Also present were Ben McKelway, Administrator and Bruce Perry, Secretary. The Commissioners were polled and voted unanimously to go immediately into executive session. ~ EXECUTIVE SESSION a. Litigation b. Approval of Minutes for September 6, 1990 The open session was reconvened at 7:42 PM ~~ COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS FROM PRESS AND PUBLIC NONE C. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Doucette - 18 Grove Lane - SE48-601 (41-441) Present were Sharon Doucette and Lisa Standley of Daylor Consulting Group Ms. Standley states that the Commission had received a revised plan showing a 1000 square foot building envelope. This reduces that wetland filling to 2560 square feet and has resulted in the elimination of the second replication area, she adds. The project as revised will not alter the flood storage capacity of the wetland and will reduce the alterations to the buffer zone to the wetland and therefore is a better project than previously submitted, she concludes. In addition, she states, that although it was not requested by the Commission, a wildlife habitat study has been submitted for your review. Mr. McKelway disagrees stating that the Commission had requested a wildlife habitat study three meetings ago but the applicant was unwilling to provide the information until now. Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission (508) 228- 7230 6 Chestnut Street Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes.for October 18, 1990 Page 2 Mr. Willet asks if the applicant has considered requesting from the Zoning Board of Appeals a front yard setback waiver? Ms. Standley responds that it has not been considered. She adds that such a reduction will create parking problems and reduce the access and use of the parcel and house. Mr. Willet states that there will be enough room to park and that there is ample precedent for the ZBA to allow the waiver and adds that the applicant should explore that option and present it to the Commission. Mr. Perry states that by moving the building envelope to 15 feet from the lot's edge, there will be a 900 square foot reduction in wetland filling. Mr. Kelliher states that at the property line adjoining the lot, he had hand dug two holes that showed water at 3 and 8 inches below the surface. He concludes that the area is already a wetland. Ms. Standley disagrees commenting that under normal circumstances there ShOllld be no water until two feet below the surface. She adds that the proposed replicated areas will provide the proper wetland hydrology. Mr. Kelliher reiterates that the proposed replication area IS already a wetland area and not upland. Ms. Standley responds that it cannot be proven through the vegetation on site. Mr. Willet asks Dr. Dunwiddie if he agreed with the wetland flagging on the site and he responds affirmatively. Mr. Perry asks where the access route for the replication work will be? Ms. Standley responds that the access route has not been shown on any plans but should be along the property line that has a less steep slope than along the middle of the lot and the equipment will go across sheets of plywood as proposed in the NOr to reduce the impacts on the wetland. Excavated soils from the replication areas will be removed offsite and the Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission (508) 228-7230 6 Chestnut Street Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for October 18, 1990 Page 3 wetland soils from the filled area will be used in the excavated area. Mr~ Perry shows the Commission various building envelopes and their effect on the wetland filling versus the 1000 square foot revised plan: a) 800 sq. ft. house results in a building envelope reduction of 20% and 1500 sq. ft. being filled which is a 29% reduc t i on over what is proposed. . b.) 450 sq. ft. house results in a building envelope reduction of 55% and 1000 sq. ft. being filled which is a 47% reduction over what is proposed. c.) The proposed 1000 sq. ft. envelope would result in 2100 sq. ft. being filled. He adds that these filling numbers do not include moving the envelopes closer to the road or the filling required for the driveway access which would be the same in all cases. With a two story house would result in doubling the living space over the actual footprint on the ground. Ms. Standley comments that it was her understanding that the Commission had requested a 1000 sq. ft. envelope. Mr. McKelway responds that contrary to what is in her letter, the Commission did not request the applicant to submit a IDOO sq. ft. envelope for its approval but suggested that an envelope reduced to the neighborhood of that size would be more appropriate. He adds that allowing this house would set a terrible precedent. He reiterates that the Commission has the authority to request a second opinion from an outside consultant who is chosen by the Commission at the applicants expense and recommends that the Commission does so. He adds that the Commission should not base its decision solely on information presented with the applicant's bias. Ms. Standley states that reason that the applicant purchased the property was that there was a negative determination on the property and today this is the only way to build a house on the lot. Town of l'lantucket Conservation Commission (508) 228- 7230 6 Chestnut Street Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for October 18, 1990 Page 4 Mr. Willet states that the Commission is aware of the previous Determination and that it has expired three years ago. In addition, the applicant came to the Commission in June 1989 with a RFD but withdrew the application before a positive Determination could be issued, he adds. Ms. Standley lists that changes from her letter that have been made during the hearing process. She adds that the Commission did not require additional information but asked to reduce the house at the last hearing. This is the fourth hearing on this file and to request a second opinion at this time seems a little late in the process. She adds that a condition on the Order could require a variance from the ZBA to allow the reduced setback. Mr. Perry responds that it was Les Smith from your firm who suggested that the Commission wait until all the information requested is submitted before deciding on the hiring ofa second opinion and this is the first meeting that the requested information has been submitted. He adds, that the proposed deck in the final submission would add an additional 200 sq. ft. to the approved footprint by the Commission's standards. Ms. Standley responds that the deck could be brought back so that it falls within the concrete retaining wall. Dr. Dunwiddie comments that at this point there is not any consideration of not allowing any structure on the lot. The applicant has gone through many contortions to redesign the project and provide the Commission additional information requested, he adds. If we were going to deny any building on the lot, we should have done it in the beginning. Mr. Kelliher states that he wants to go on record that, in his opinion, the entire lot is a wetland and have stated so since the field inspection. Norman Chelecki, representing an abutter, comments that in the first meetlng he had suggested that the application be denied based on the existing regulations. Mr. Perry suggests that the second replication area be put back into any approved plan. In previous plans that the Commission had allowed wetland filling, the Commission had Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission (508) 228- 7230 6 Chestnut Street Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for October 18, 1990 Page 5 required 150 200 X replication to the filling. In this case, where the house is sitting in a wetland, the additional replication is clearly justified. Mr. McKelway suggests that a performance bond be required to allow for funds to be available to repair the reolication areas if necessary. Ms. Standley requests that the hearing be closed. MOTION: To close the hearing and draft an Order of Conditions was made and seconded. UNANIMOUS 2. Richards - 25 East Tristram Ave. - SE48-609 (31-1) MOTION: To continue the hearing for additional information at the request of the applicant was made and seconded. UNANIMOUS 3. Maury - Millbrook Road - SE48-616 (57-23) Present was Bob Emack of Nantucket Surveyors. Mr. Willet reads the letter from Bob Emack as a result of the additional test pit to determine the ground water level under the septic system. Mr. Emack stated that the groundwater elevation was at 5.4 feet which is within 0.1 foot of the elevation at the other test site. He adds that the approximate elevation of the water in the pond across the street was within two tenths of this elevation. MOTION: To close the hearing and draft an Order of Conditions was made and seconded. UNANIMOUS 4. Old North Wharf (Omega Reno.) - (42.2.1-34) Present for the applicant was Melissa Philbrick. Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission (508) 228- 7230 6 Chestnut Street Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for October 18, 1990 Page 6 Mrs. Philbrick submits a plan to the Commission that shows the limit of work snow fence as requested at the last meeting. MOTION: To continue the hearing for a DEP file number was made and seconded. UNANIMOUS 5. Dujardin - Eel Point Road - (32-4) MOTION: To continue the hearing for a DEP file number was made and seconded. UNANIMOUS * 6. Heydt - Brant Point Road - SE48-617 (29-153,156,161) MOTION: To continue the hearing for additional information was made and seconded. UNANIMOUS 7. Watts - Otokomi Roau - NAN-006 - (56-197) Lot 5 8. Watts - Otokoffii Road - NAN-007 - (56-197) Lot 6 9. Watts - Otokomi Road - NAN-008 - (56-197) Lot 7 10.Watts - Otokomi Road - NAN-009 - (56-197) Lot 8 11.Watts - Otokomi Road - NAN-010 - (56-197) ROAD c. Watts - Otokomi Road - (56-197) - ROAD ONLY *** NOTE: These NOIs and RFD were discussed concurrently *** Present was Bruce Watts, applicant, Melissa Philbrick and Leo Asadoorian of Hart and Blackwell Associates. Mrs. Philbrick submits revised plans showing the limits of the Isolated Land Subject to Flooding (ILSF) and the storage capacity of the area. She comments that the boundary is at Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission (508) 228- 7230 6 Chestnut Street Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Meeting"Minutes far October 18, 1990 Page 7 the 10.41 foot elevation and she reads a letter from David Haines requesting a Negative Determination. Mr. Perry adds that there are many variables that goes into the watershed calculations and therefore the actual ILSF boundary could fluctuate. Mr. Asadoorian states that the orange line on the plan is the outer limit of all five different runs through the computer program. This results in at most a four foot change from the wetland boundary at the sediment basin area. Mr. McKelway asks why the basin was not moved to be outside the resource, ILSF? Mrs. Philbrick responds that the work will not have any impact on the resource and in fact will increase the flood storage capacity slightly. In David Haines' opinion that the proposed work within the ILSF will not alter the resource and that is why the basin was not revised to be entirely outside the resource. Mr. McKelway asks if the additional water that is to be added to the ILSF from the road was taken into account when calculating the ILSF boundary. Mr. Asadoorian responds that it was not. MOTION: To issue a negative Determination commenting that the work is subject to but w~ll not alter the resource was made and seconded. UNANIMOUS Mrs~ Philbrick that in relation to the Local NOls, a Condition could be that when the exa=t footprint is developed for the lots, the lot owner could come in and get approval from the Commission. In addition, she adds, on-going maintenance of the catch and sediment basins, the sewer line will be the responsibility of the Homeowners Association, and while she does not have a copy of the agreement she suggests that a Condition that prevents any additional work on the lots and road before the submittal of the document would be acceptable. Town of Nantu.cket Conserv a bon COlYlmission (508) 228- 7230 6 Chestnut Street Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for October 18i 1990 Page 8 Mr. McKelway adds that the local regulations do not have a buffer zone around an ILSF. Mr. Perry comments that on Let # 8 the Commission would rather see an owner go to the ZBA for a front yard setback waiver rather than allowing any incursion in to the 50 foot buffer to the wetland. Mrs. Philbrick concurs commenting that because of the unique nature of the zoning change on that lot, she can see ZBA allowing the waiver. MOTION: To close the hearings and draft Orders of Conditions for the lots was made and seconded. UNANIMOUS * 12.Moran - Ames Ave. - (60.2.4-63) Present for the applicant was Glen Wills of Nantucket Surveyors. Mr. Willet reads the field inspection report. Mr. Kelliher asks if the applicant will strip the soil from around the house? Mr. Wills responds that most of the area will be stripped and clean soil will be brought in. The Town owns the land that is being used as the access to the property. It may be necessary in the future to change the driveway access to Madaket Road if the Town does not want to allow the existing driveway. The top of bank is hard to determine on the site and the exposed area will be replanted with beach grass, bayberry and beach plum. Mr. Perry states that the septic design is for a five bedroom house. What is the applicant planning to do with the excess capacity? Mr. Wills responds that the septic system is being moved to outside of 100 feet of the bank and is designed to handle the other cottages on the property and the applicant is.not trying to convince the Commission that the existing cottage is a five bedroom dwelling. He states that the proposed deck Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission (508) 228-7230 6 Chestnut Street Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for October 18, 1990 Page 9 is eight feet wide and is recessed two feet on either end of the house. MOTION: To continue the file for additional information and a DEP file number was made and seconded. UNANIMOUS * 13.Harris - 19 Baltimore Street - {85-8S) Present for the applicant was Glen Wills of Nantucket Surveyors. Mr. Willet reads the inspection report. Mr-. Wills states that the final foundation elevation will be only one block above the existing grade at the lowest point (approximately 10.2 elevation) and he agrees to submit the final septic plan when approved by DEP. MOTION: To continue the hearing for additional information and a DEP file number was made and seconded. UNANIMOUS * 14.Baker - Madaket Road (59.4-119.1) Present for the applicant was Glen Wills of Nantucket Surveyors. Mr. Willet reads the inspection report. Mr. Wills submits a new plan showing the building envelope changes as a result of the change in the wetland boundary after field inspection, the siltation fence is still at a 30 foot s~paration from the wetland and the leach trenches have been moved closer to the road. The expansion trench goes under the bike path but when the system fails, it is more likely that they will replace the system in the same location instead of digging up the bikepath. MOTION: To continue the hearing tor a DEP file number and additional information was made and seconded. UNANIMOUS Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission (508) 228- 7230 6 Chestnut Street Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for October 18, 1990 Page 10 * 15.Dumetella Realty Trust - Medouie Creek - (20-2) Present for the applicant was Arthur Reade, counsel and Bob Emack of Nantucket Surveyors. Mr. Willet reads the inspection report. Mr. Emack submits a revised plan as a result of the field inspection that has the wetland boundary following approximately 13 foot contour. He adds that the expansion area is for reserve purposes only, it is unlikely that it will be used so far from the house. If we could leave the flagging in the reserve area the same it would make the expansion area location easier, he states. The wetland across the street is some what higher than the boundary on the lot. He adds that the top of the foundation is anticipated to be around the 24 foot elevation. He suggests that a rationale be developed to allow some additional clearing of the house site. Dr. Dunwiddie comments that a lot of trees would have to be cleared just to open up the footprint and he suggests that trees with a diameter greater than three inches should stay and possibly the trees could be tagged before they are removed. Mr. Perry adds that the initial worry is that the lot owner or a real estate agent will clear immediately up to the allowed limits without consideration of the trees' importance. Mr; Reade states that there will not be a prohibition against clearing trees but the Commission wants input on the treES that are to be removed. He wants to make sure that in the future, it will be clear to potential owners and the Commission on the possibility of tree removal. Dr. Dunwiddie agrees commenting that the Commission wishes to avoid a similar problem like the one that occurred on the Nightingale property when a significant stand of trees was cut down. Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission (508) 228- 7230 6 Chestnut Street Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for October 18, 1990 Page 11 Mr. Emack suggests that the Commission could approve cutting of the trees within the building envelope but not outside the envelope without Commission approval. Dr. Dunwiddie suggests some wording in the Order that gives the rationale of the Commission's decision commenting that trees of this size are significant to the island and that the Commission is worried about the removal of a large number of trees. Mr. Reade comments that he approves of the idea of Commission approval of the final house footprint and then the trees within the footprint would, of course, be allowed to be removed. He adds that preparation of the lot for' sale would not include removing the trees and grading. MOTION: To continue the hearing to additional information, DEP file number, and an additional field inspection was made and seconded. UNANIMOUS D. REGULAR MEETING 1. REQUEST FOR DETERMINATION a. Trustees of Reservation - Wauwinet Rd. - (20-6) Commissioner Kelliher abstains from the discussion and the vote. Present for the applicant was John Shugrue. Mr. Willet reads the inspection report. Mr. Shugrue submits a new plan showing the revised wetland boundary and septic design. He states that the proposed dwelling will be housing for the caretaker of the Trustees' proper ties. Mr. Perry states that the property was mowed up to the wetland boundary and the applicent should be reminded about the 25 foot undisturbed buffer. Town of Nantucket Conservation COlnmission (508) 228- 7230 6 Chestnut Street Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for October 18, 1990 Page 12 MOTION: To issue a negative Determination commenting that the property is subject to pratection but the proposal will not alter the resource. The issuance of the Determination is subject to the Commission receiving a plan that shows the driveway and a line of silt fence. Made and seconded. UNAN I f10US b. Marine Department - Town Pier - (42.2.3 - 2) Present was Dave Fronzuto, Superintendent of the Marine Department. Mr. Fronzuto comments that the abutters objections have been withdrawn from this project. He adds that the pilings will be probably be driven or vibrated in place using the equipment that is on hand doing the work for Winthrop. Mr. Perry adds that he was surprised when Mrs. Loring's attorney called this afternoon to say that she was not going to object further to the proposal. MOTION: To issue a Negative Determination commenting that the proposed work is within the resource but will not alter the resource was made and seconded. UNANIMOUS * d. Callan - Wauwinet Road - (11-20) Present was the applicant Susan Callan. Mr. Willet reads the inspection report. Ms. Callan explains the project and comments that she had proposed a shower enclosure on the harbor side of the house but now agrees to put the enclosure on the sides of the house away f,om the harbor. MOTION: To issue a negative Determination commenting that no additions are allowed on the North side of the house was made and seconded. Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission (508) 228- 7230 6 Chestnut Street Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for October 18, 1990 Page 13 UNANIMOUS * e. Greenleaf - Easton Street - (42.1.4 - 26) Present for the applicant was Arthur Reade, counsel and Bob Emack of Nantucket Surveyors. Mr. Willet reads the inspection report. Mr. Emack submits a plan showing a limit of work line that is 115-120 feet back from the wetland boundary. MOTION: To issue a negative Determination that the proposed work is not subject to protection under the Act was made and seconded. UNANIMOUS * f. Town of Nantucket - Polpis Road Bikepath MOTION: To continue at the request of the applicant for a field inspection and additional information was made and seconded. UNANIMOUS 2. ORDER OF CONDITIONS a. David Poor - Lauretta Lane - SE48-599 (14-10.2) Present for the applicant was Tom King. Mr. King submits the revised plans dS requested by the Commission and comments: # 11 He suggests that this condition should be deleted commenting that the existing house is already is within 15 feet of the bank and the deck will reduce the impacts on the bank. Dr. Dunwiddie comments that if the people in the house are not walking on the deck they will be walking on the bank. He adds that the runoff from the outside shower should be Town of Na11tucket Conservation Commission (508) 228- 7230 6 Chestnut Street Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for October 18, 1990 Page 14 connected to the septic system and not be allowed to run into the ground. MOTION: To issue the Order of Conditions with the suggested changes and to delete Condition ~ 15 was made and seconded. UNANIMOUS ADDITIONAL SPECIAL CONDITIONS DAVID POOR DEP FILE NUMBER SE48 - 599 ASSESSOR'S MAP 14, PARCEL 10.2 17 LAURETTA LANE UNDER THE MASSACHUSETTS WETLANDS PROTECTION ACT ( MGL CHAPTER 131, SECTION 40 ) AND THE WETLANDS BYLAW OF THE TOWN OF NANTUCKET ( CHAPTER 136 ) 3. Prior to any activity at the site, a line of snowfence and haybales shall be staked between the house and the wetland resource areas, as shown on the final approved plan. Erected to prevent siltation, erosion, and filling of the resource areas during construction, this line will also serve as a limit of activity for work crews and to contain windblown debris. 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. 4. 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 the final approved plan. The as-built plan shall include, but not be limited to, the 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 wetland. Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission (508) 228- 7230 6 Chestnut Street Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for October 18, 1990 Page 15 5. 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, the Nantucket Wetlands Bylaw, the Regulations promulgated under the Bylaw, the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, and pertinent Massachusetts regulations (310 CMR 10.00 through 10.99). The Commission may require the submittal of any data deemed necessary by the Commission for that evaluation. 6. The applicant, owners, successors or assignees shall 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 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. 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 be collected and disposed of responsibly off the site. No on-site disposal of these items is a 11 owed. 9. 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. 10. This Order of Conditions shall apply to any successor in interest or successor in control of the property. 11. When the project is finished, the highest point of the house shall be no higher than 20 feet, 1 inch from existing grade (two feet above the existing height). No contour changes are permitted. 12. Natural vegetation between the coastal bank and the project site shall be left intact except where it is necessary to Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission (508) 228- 7230 6 Chestnut Street Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for October 18, 1990 Page 16 temporarily ,use this area. After construction, any disturbed area within this buffer area shall be revegetated. 13. To minimize adverse effects on wildlife, fisheries, and shellfish, the use of any pesticide or fertilizer more than 15 feet from the house is prohibited. 14. To prevent possible pollution of the nearby saltmarsh and harbor and possible erosion of the coastal bank, the outdoor shower shall drain into the septir. system. 15. No coastal engineering structure of any kind shall be permitted on the property in the future to protect the project allowed by this Order. Section 310 CMR 10.30 (3) of the Wetlands Regulations, promulgated under MG~ 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. WAIVER UNDER THE NANTUCKET WETLANDS BYLAW: The Commission hereby grants the applicant two waivers from Section 2.05(B)(5) of the Wetlands Protection Regulations of the Town of Nantucket, under the Wetlands Bylaw (Chapter 136). This section requires projects which are not water-dependent to maintain at least a 25-foot natural undisturbed area adjacent to a coastal bank. The same section requires all structures which are not water-dependent to be at least 50 feet from a coastal bank. Section 2.06(B)(4) of the Regulations sets forth the same restrictions for work near a salt marsh. Therefore, these sections would apply to the proposed deck and outdoor shower, shown in red on the final approved plan. 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 deck and shower will, as conditioned above, have no adverse effect upon any of the interests protected by the Bylaw. Therefore, these waivers are granted under the authority of Sections 1.03(F)(1) and 1.03(F)(2)(a} and (d) of the Wetlands Protection Regulations. ### ,/ r. I Cf.{2 ( '. d ^ ? 10 ({Jr20 /1//' ,lt77 i. -;;AJ~ [11"t /~ JcY~( / I' I!( , //1 1"-- I,..i'"- '(