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'"- '(