Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-12-13 4ttrl' . / . /-'- i/ fill#/-. (/ Town of Nantucket Conseryation Commission (50E, 1228-7230 10 South Beach Street Nantucket. Massachusetts 02554 MEETING MINUTES FOR DECEMBER 13. 1990 The meeting was called to order at 7:02 PM in the Large Group Instruction Room of the Nantucket High School. Commissioners present were William Willet, Peter Wilson, Laura Hussey, Peter Dunwiddie and Henry Wasierski. Also present were Bruce Perry, Administrator, and Lucia Wyeth, Secretary. A. EXECUTIVE SESSION The commission was polled and voted unanimously to go in~o Executive Session. 7:03 PM a. Litigation b. Approval of Minutes for Sept. 20 and Oct. 18, 1990 The Open Meeting was reconvened at 7:14 PM ~ COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS FROM PRESS AND PUBLIC None C. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Richards - 25 East Tristram Ave. - SE48-609 (31-1) ,MOTION: To continue the hearing at the request of the applicant was made and seconded. " UNANIMOUS 2. Heydt - Brant Point Road - SE48-617 <29-153,156,161) MOTION: To continue the hearing at the request of the applicant was made and seconded. UNANIMOUS 3. Santa Rita Trust - Polpis Road - (SE48-630) (26-22.4) Present for the applicant was Attorney Melissa Philbrick. Attorney Philbrick states the ridge elevation is 28'6" above the grade of the slab. "J >d reevclcd paper Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission (508) 228-7230 10 South Beach Street Nantucket. Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for December 13, 1990 Page 2 Mr. Perry comments that the ho~i..e; restr icted to 24' and he reads from the restrictions in the Order on the house. The concern is the view coming into the harbor. Asked for an idea of the scale of the building. Attorney Philbrick responds it is 24' x 24'. Also stated she had gone back through some tapes when the possibility of their being sheds, garages and dwelling units outside the envelope and the restricted area was discussed and it was stated that these structures would be outside the building envelope. Mr. Willet asks if there is any other information needed. Mr. Perry asks if we want to see the plans. Attorney Philbrick suggests a draft order be written for next time and the hearing be left open to discuss elevations at the next meeting. MOTION: 'To continue for additional information was made and seconded. UNANIMOUS 4. Doucette - 18 Grove Lane - SE48-601 (41-441) MOTION: To continue the hearing at the request of the applicant was made and seconded. UNANIMOUS 5. Lamb - 105 Wauwinet Road - SE48-633 (12-40.1) Present for the applicant was John Shugrue. Mr. Shugrue states he has additional information and a few changes; submits revised plans and a request for a waiver. Mr. Perry interrupts to ask clarification of previous discussion regarding the amount to be charged for the filing fee. @ recycled paper Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission (50S) 228-7230 10 South Beach Street Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for December 13, 1990 Page 3 Commission states that it was under the impression it was decided at last meeting to be $55/lot with 24 hook ups and proposes a motion so stating. Mr. Shugrue asks for discussion. not a category 1 project. Suggests each house 15 Mr. Perry responds that it was discussed as the snme impact as a septic replacement. That it was not a new project as there was already water going there but where it's going is new so it was not exempt utility. At the same time he does not believe it is a $250 charge. Mr. Shugrue states he thinks it is a one time $250 charge based on Category 2(e) of 310 CMR 10.53(3)(K) regarding routine maintenance and repair of water bearing structures including culverts, drainage easements, ditches, water courses and artificial water conveyances to insure flow capabilities which existed effective date of part 3, April 1, 1983. Mr. Wasierskiasks if he considers an artificial water conveyance to be a water main. Discussion on definition and also if it lS a public utility. Dr. Dunwiddie questions the idea that this lS routine maintenance. Mr. Shugrue responds existing pipes are getting corroded, some are still steel and that they are in the vegetation in the upland. Replacing them instead under the existing road will save loss of vegetation. Additionally he states that Mrs. Conover's house should not be charged as her house was being reconnected at the point of the existing system and he was not crossing their lot. Further clarified that every lot that he crossed that had a house on it attached to the hotel would be charged $55. Estimated there would be about 20 houses. A motion was made and seconded to charge a fee of $55/lot crossed on the barrier beach and the pump house. "~ recycled paper Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission (508) 22E,-7230 10 South Beach Street Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for December 13, 1990 Page 4 UNANIMOUS Mr. Shugrue presents the additional information. The hotel pumps a maximum of 28,000 gallons a day and their draw down is 3"in a 425' radius. Estimates he will pump 9,000 gallons roughly making a draw down of between 1'-1 1/2' which gives an area of 150' radius around the well being affected. Mr. Wasierski asks how these figures were arrived at. Mr. Shugrue responds that they were calculated b~t are theoretical based on what the hotel already uses. He continues that the rate he is calculating is based on the number of bedrooms in the cottages on the barrier beach and this number comes to approximately 9000 gallons per day. If he uses the figures of the existing system drawing down t~ree inches for the 28,000 gallon draw down, then the proposed system will be a third of that draw down and the radius ~ill be at 150 feet. Mr. Perry asks what is the overlap between the two well systems. Mr. Shugrue states the hotel's circle will be smaller and they will touch at the upper end but the overlap is minimal. At most it may pull the radius out to 170 feet and, he adds, most of the surface water in the area is not going to be used by the wells due to soil conditions. Mr. Perry asks if he is familiar with the septic systems in the area? Mr. Shugrue states yes, that they were all located back along Crows Nest Way and the groundwater flows are basically north. Mr. Willet asks if the status of the hotel is not that of a water company and if new houses ~ight not tie in. Mr. Shugrue responds that no, they are on a well that was in the ground and that through word of mouth over the years they have serviced these houses. Basically there will not be any more houses in the area and new houses now have to either @ recycled paper Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission (508) 22<,:---;-:Z;j(j 10 South Beach Street Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for December 13, 1990 Page 5 have a well on the property or be on a municipal water system. Mr. Perry asks if he does not have to file something witn DEP Water Pollution. Mr. Shugrue responds that if he had to file under their regulations he would file. However, at this point he understands from the applicant's lawyers he does not have :0 file. Mr. Willet asks if he does have to file will they not oSk for more information. Mr. Shugrue verifies they (DEP) will and also make them buy more land. Mr. Willet continues that if this is a possibility it would be good to keep this hearing open for additional information. Mr. Shugrue responds that right now he is not filing wi~h DEP. To file requires some testing. At this point if this hearing is not closed he can't even draw the wells. Mr. Perry repeats that he understands a filing is requirEd with DEP under Water Quality Department, that the Health Department feels thi~ must be filed as well. Suggests we keep the hearing open till we get a letter from someone stating that filing with DEP is in fact not required. Mr. Shugrue continues when questioned that he has a fl02r plan with an envelope and he is going to keep the pump house as low as he can by the codes. As far as visual goes, after the shingles are weathered and the vegetation has grown back in it will be very subtle. Access will consist of 2, 7-8 driveways. Dr. Dunwiddie asks if Health Department will be reviewi~g the project. Mr. Shugrue says yes, he does have to get well permits so he is going to see it. But he can't file for the well permits till he finishes with the Commission. -.,. . 70 _Jl} recycled paper Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission (5081 :2:28-7230 10 South Beach Street Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for December 13, 1990 Page 6 Dr. Dunwiddie asks about filing per the state regulations relative to the number of houses per well and taking into consideration the number of bedrooms. Mr. Shugrue asks which set of regulations he is refe~ring to and informs the Commission there is a new set of regulations and under the revised set he does not have to file. The old set said if the house was not used for 180 days a year you didn't have to file. He does not believE any of the houses up there are used 180 days. In the old set it was not clear. The new set is very specific. Mr. Perry asks if we feel the DEP water quality lS important enough to weigh; wonders if it should be left until the next meeting to get clarification of whether mu s t f i 1 e . open Mr. Willet adds more specific information is needed. what information DEP will request. Asks Mr. Shugrue agrees to give us a set of the information after he does file and says if we want to reopen the hearing at that time that is fine. However, insists the way he reads the regulation he does not have to file with the State. Mr. Willet says he would like to verify the information. Asks that for the next meeting we, have something in writing that filing is not required if that is the case. Mr. Wasierski suggests that included in the additi00al information is something stating where the discharge water is going during the pump tests. MOTION: To continue for additional informa~ic~ to the next meeting was made and seconded. UNANIMOUS 6. Briskman - 2 Long Pond Drive - SE48-631 (59-28) Mr. Willet abstains from the discussion and any vote. .~ recycled paper Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission (508) 22~-7230 10 South Beach Street Nantucket. Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for December 13, 1990 Page 7 Present for the applicant is Glen Wills of Nantucket Surveyors and Melissa Philbrick, counsel. Dr. Dunwiddie states that he and Mr. Wills went out to the site and there seems to be wetland shrubs starting to cra~l up the hill above the wetlands. The wetland line would be a judgement call. The original line was following a break in the slope above the bog. There is no real clear change in vegetation where that line was. There was basically a break in slope. Glen has flagged a new line 15-25' above the older line which is consider~bly more conservative. There is even wetland vegetation above the dividing line we had used. Glen dug down 3 feet into the soil and there is no indication tnat it ever gets wet. This is a instance where wetland shrubs grow above the wetland line. Is of the feeling that the line he has delineated is basically a good one where it is. Mr. Wills comments that 2 flags were added, orange anC white stripe. He has located the additional flags and drawn in the area that remains, following the existing setback requirements that we have ~nd following the 25' building setback that was maintained with the original proposed building location for this filing. The area that rema1GS lS 8' wide and tr iangular 15' long. He has reviewed the information with Mr. Briskman and Melissa Philbrick to see if there is a viable solution tc getting a building on that site. They have come to the conclusion that as far as environmental protection is concerned and being able to put a residence on the lot that maintains as much of a buffer to the wetland as possible and disturbing the least amount of area, the original site shown on the plan comes back as the viable area, he states. Attorney Philbrick states that the view issue, which was the issue pushing the house to the other side, lS not necessarily resolved. Mr. Perry states that setting the house 6' away from the bicycle path is horrible. Mr. Wasierski agrees. Mr. Wills states this is why a vegetated buffer is planned. J~ recycled paper Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission (508) 22:S- -:-:2:30 10 South Beach Street Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for December 13, 1990 PagE 8 Mr. Perry questions the height of the buffer and its ability in providing a visual buffer to the bikepath. Mr. Wills comments that the plan is for a 2-story salt ::ox type house with the tall side facing south and a 1-story north eave. Also, the current envelope is 400' smaller than the previously approved one or about 1600 sq ft. This is ~Cl try and maintain the 25' buffer. Mr. Wills continues even if the house is moved to the other corner, that is across the street from a vacant lot, and it is very possible a house will be someday built there which would effect the view anyway. Standing at the corne- what you would see is the house, the dump and the radio tCfter and no open water. The only place you can see water is opposite Long Pond Drive. Mr. Perry disagrees; states that you can see a wide expanse of water and that property on the other side of tre pond is conservation land and the house is going to be whe-e you look across. He suggests that the Commission needs to ;0 out there and get some ideas. Mr. Wills comments that it appears we are getting away from protecting the wetland and more about scenic views. If we go on the other side or regardless of how we do it we a~e going to be in the 25' buffer. Dr. Dunwiddie disagrees, stating that he thinks we are trying to balance the wetland/scenic views interest with these other interests and the other location would be less objectionable. Mr. Wills asks what would be the area of building allOfted and what do you want to see against the wetland edge in t-e buffer zone. True, we can design something that doesn't go into the wetland edge and it is a fairly conservative edge as far as the edge of the bog is concerned. What do you war~ as far as setbacks are concerned. Mr. Perry comments that irrespective of which location it goes in, the Commission should request a smaller building envelope so it is not 25' into the 50' setback. @ recycled paper Town of Nantucket Conservation Commissi'on (508) 2:2E,-7230 10 South Beach Street Nantucket. Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for December 13, 1990 Page 9 Mr. Wills responds that was brought on by the commission in denying an extension on an approved permit that was 25' from the edge of the wetland. He do~s not believe this to be as much of an issue as putting the building within the 25'. Mr. Perry responds that 1600 sq ft building envelope is too large. Mr. Wills says his concern is what the setback from the wetland is going to be if he were encouraged to do it on ~he other side in order to coordinate requirements of the Boa!d of Appeals regarding setback from the road. Currently tney require 30' setback. In the past he has found the decision to grant a variance to be based on the fact that there was no other alternative. Attorney Philbrick states if she has to argue with the Board of Appeals the sole argument is why I have to put it here instead of here. Dr. Dunwiddie counters he doesn't think she has to blame the Commission for the variance request; he adds that he doesn't think she'll find anyone on the island that is excited about a house 6' from the bike path. Attorney Philbrick returns that the .crunch toward the bike path comes from the 25' wetland buffer and if it didn't matter as much they could push back the house site from tne bike path. She has talked to the Board about this but has had to show the wetland concern each time. She would be happy to explain the balancing we are trying to do. Dr. Dunwiddie says he would like to go out and see the site, looking from the point of view of a house location. If you could give me some sense of what considerations you would have within the 25' buffer zone, we can try to see what kind of building envelope we could do in that area in this location relative to the setback. Attorney Philbrick states that the current building envelope is 1600 sq ft. There are no actual plans, except those for a 2000 sq. ft. envelope in the expired file. }~ ,,~ recycled paper Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission '(508) 2:2~--;-:2;3(J 10 South Beach Street Nantucket. Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for December 13, 1990 Page 10 Dr. Dunwiddie states that if they kept 25 feet from thE 1985 delineation it would range from 10' to 0'. Mr. Perry notes that they are requesting 2 waivers and that perhaps the footprint should be smaller. Dr. Dunwiddie suggests trying another plan, perhaps 10 =ff the currently flagged line and a IS' front yard setback w::h considerably smaller footprint. Mr. Perry says the next inspection date is January 2 a~: suggests we visit the site again. MOTION: and a field To continue the hearing for more informati:~ inspection was made and seconded. UNANIMOUS 7. Johnson - 34 Easton Street - SE48-634 (421.4-18) Present for the applicant is John Shugrue and Melissa Philbrick. Present is Arthur Reade representing abutters: Theodo~e and Mary Cross who own property directly across the street: Ted Cross' daughter, Lisa Gray, a direct abutter; Robert Horner, a direct abutter on the other side; and property owners one house down in each direction on the water side Anthony Cahill and Leo Gillispie. Here with him for the hearing are Les Smith of Daylor Consulting, Ted Cross fr=~ New York and Mrs. Gillispie's son Pat Gillispie. Mr. Shugrue presents modifications to the original pla-. The system as designed will pump directly into the town sewer. He revised those plans to install a lift station behind the bulkheads. This will eliminate all chances of pollution unless someone crashes into the dock and breaks the pipe. Mr. Wi llet asks -if the float size had been scaled down. Mr. Shugrue responds it had been considered but the beat is exactly the same size as the float--60' long so Mr. Johnson therefol-e wants the float to be 60' long. @ recycled paper Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission (508) 228-7230 10 South Beach Street Nantucket. Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for December 13, 1990 Page 11 Mr. Reade states that he has a problem with the comment in the request stating the reason for the town sewer hook up was to avoid using the other method. Wants to know what is meant by "the other method". In his opinion suggests some risk in how much care would be taken in handling the pump-out to prevent pollution. Mr. Shugrue responds that it can either be pumped out there or taken over to town pier or it can be taken half way out the channel and dumped. Commission says you have to go 3 miles out to dump; asks why would he suggest he would do it in the channel. Mr. Shugrue concedes the sentence should not have been in the NOI. Les Smith distributes a report that summarizes concerns discussed previously. Mr. Reade says he has a problem with a 60' long float. With regard to the pump out facility he has a concern with the fact the .septic in the boat is treated with formaldehyde which one would not expect with residential use be put directly into the sewer system. He wonders if it needs to be pretreated and suggests a study is needed to see what the affect will be to the sewer system. According to Les, currently a marine task force consisting of the DEP, EPA and the State CZM, is developing design standards for these facilities. He thinks we should hear the result of the study before making a decision which may be in conflict with the recommendations of the task force. He continues with the concern Df a 60' long float tied to the pier. Refers to Mr. Horner's letter read at the last meeting which would cause a serious obstruction of the movement of the water. Mr. Gillispie additionally questions the dimensions of 60 feet for the houseboat. He (Gillespie) believes it is more like 30' and he ~onders if the real intent is not to tie up additional boats. Summarizes with the questions of need and the affect it will have on the circulation of water in the tidal system. ~ recycled paper Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission, (508) 22~- -:';:::::1) 10 South Beach Street Nantucket. Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for December 13, 1990 Page :2 Les Smith reviews the handout. He questions the need f=- a float and states most piers are open pile rather than floats because the area is a velocity zone and early storms are possible. A float could be a safety hazard relative t: storm damage. Additionally, he adds, there is the effect =- wetland scenic views. This is a very visible area coming into the harbor as well as from Children's Beach. The pum: out suggests the pier will be used as a permanent berth fo- the houseboat instead of temporary. Also, he wonders abou: _ pump out dumping directly into the sewer with no pre- treatment. What is a Johnny trap pump out and its operati:-. What is the draft of the boat and he questions the ability =f the boat to sit above the bottom during low tide. The boa: sits low in the water and is an obstruction. Mr. Reade continues to asks how it should be rated In precedent value. A float and pump out could result in mar. more applicants. Zoning regulations prohibit new piers un::l fall 91. Existing piers, let alone any new ones in residential neighborhoods could come back with similar requests. Statement was made regarding extending a bulkhead out into the harbor that if we built out far enou;- eventually there wasn't going to be a harbor any more. We are a long way from that but the fact is the harbor is a limited resource and very important one for the Town of Nantucket. Any piers or pier extensions should be looked __ very carefully. What effect is this going to have on the shoreline. 'What damage could the float cause in a storm. Mr. Ted Cross who represents his daughter Lisa Grey questions the need for a float this large. States he has -3J the boat for many years and the request is totally unreasonable. That the area no longer flushes out with the tide and the ferry waves as it used to, due to all the boa:: there. Also in the summer, there is a build up of gasoline and oil and an immense amount of ell grass. Adding 60' float would compound the problem. The area supports a sem:- commercial operation in a residential area as it is. UrgE: we delay a decision in order to view the area in July to see how current use affects the area. With regard to the haza-: of having this connection, notes that although this is a houseboat it is also a party boat and, he suggests, there __ lack of care in docking after partying at night. This appears to be a guest house with all the plumbing. He ,I\) l} recycled paper Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission (508) 2:2~-7230 10 South Beach Street Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for December 13, 1990 Pag~ 13 suggests that permanent docks at Monomoy or in the harbor could come in and request a pumpout and create additional living space on their docks. By allowing this use we are establishing a precedent. Mr. Ted Gillispie presents photos taken from his mothe-'s porch. He has a concern with the size of the houseboat. Compares the size of a 20' whaler and suggests 60' is not necessary for a float. He continues that the water flow :s obstructed by the number of boats and the ell grass in season. Now that the boats are gone there is tidal flush:ng. Now on the other side we'll have a 60' float. Mr. Willet asks John Shugrue if he has any comments. Mr. Shugrue answers no, he does not have any answers. Dr. Dunwiddie asks what would be the pros and cons for removing the last 60' of the pier and replacing it with a floating dock; would it be a feasible alternative to this proposal? Mr. Shugrue responds no, they were more dangerous. Dr. Dunwiddie asks how Taylor does his. Mr. Reade responds that Taylor's is considerably smaller. Dr. Dunwiddie says he would like to hear objections or support of an alternative which might result in no greate- impact at least in square footage over what is currently there. Dr. Dunwiddie states would like more information about the houseboat. What are its dimensions, where are the access and egress points from the boat. Additionally, an abutter asks the need be stated. At :nis point the request seems to be only the fact that he wants it. Attorney Philbrick agrees to ascertain needs as perceived by the owner and what environmental impact. How it will affect water flow. What part of the proposal causes neit-er increased activity nor environmental impact. a recycled paper Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission (508) 22~-7230 10 South Beach Street Nantucket. Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for December 13, 1990 Pa;e 14 Mr. Wilson asks how the float is removed and where does it go. Mr. Shugrue responds that it consists of 5 pieces; he ~ill find out the lengths. Dr. Dunwiddie questions the comment in Les Smith's le::er alluding to boat dealership activities. Mr. Perry states that the caretaker sells outboard boats. Attorney Philbrick asks if all public pump-outs deal ~::n pretreatment. Mr. Shugrue responds pretreatment IS necessary to dea: with formaldehyde. MOTION: seconded. To continue for more information was made 3nd UNANIMOUS * 8. Poor Quidnet Road-(SE48-635)(20-49,50.2,50.3;21-58,::~) * 9. Poor - Quidnet Road -- (21-122,118.1,119.1,119.2) The hearing is opened under the State only, not the -:--..". Both notices are discussed concurrently. No field inspec:ion report has been written. Present for the applicant lS Lisa Standley of Daylor. Ms. Standley shows the Commission an aerial photo map. States that the Commission requested they file Notice of Intent for work that is on-going on the properties which ^E describe as maintenance brush cut areas and agricultural activity. Most of the activity has taken place in uplar= areas but brush has been cut to the edge of wetlands in -any areas. Some work within the' wetland area shown as B on t~e plan. The NOI requests an OOC from the commission to pe~~it activities within the buffer zone. The intent is to ali:~ the altered wetlands to become naturally revegetated. T~e~e will be no further clearing of any areas on the site wit-:Jt ~ recycled paper Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission (508) 228-7230 10 South Beach Street Nantucket. Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for December 13, 1990 Page 15 actually flagging the wetland boundary and properly filing a NOI before the Commission. Mr. Perry states that some of the area is zoned agricultural and some residential. - Ms. Standley responds that she has not looked at the zoning. The revised plan will identify the parcel numbers. One lot line is wrong and is shown in error. One parcel has no activity. They are filing for brush cutting and land clearing which has been done. Commission questions title to the land. Mr. Perry says he has had a short discussion with town counsel with regard to accepting a NOI. If ownership is unclear, we can accept it but the OOC has to be sent to the owner. Proof of partial interest in the identified parcels in the NOI must be shown by the end of the hearings. He believes to file a NOI on all these parcels should require a letter stating he has some interest in these parcels, some outright, some varying interests. Ms. Standley comments that in terms of ownership they have attempted to file for all the brushcutting and clearing that has been done or is ongoing in the buffer zone with the exception of the parcel included in error by them. Ownership 1S cloudy on several of the parcels. Some he owns and some he has a partial interest in. Mr. Reade states that Mr. Poor has some ownership interest but he has not seen the plan nor has he done any title research work. Dr. Dunwiddie asks if you have partial interest can you file an NOI and get permission to do work if the other owners don't care or don't know? Mr. Reade responds he is not sure that there is anything under the wetland protection act that even contemplates the question arising. If you own an interest you have the right to use it. Anyone who has an interest can do an RFD. @ recvcled paper Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission (508) 228-';":230 10 South Beach Street Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for December 13, 1990 Page 16 Dr. Dunwiddie asks if he wanted to file a NOI on Mr. Poor's property, he could do so? Mr. Redde responds he thinks this is a legitimate point. Generally, if you have a, partial interest in a piece of property you have the right to use that piece of property. You don't have to get the consent of all the other owners. It would seem that if that use involves an activity that comes within state or local jurisdiction than that part ow-er of the property who proposes to make a use can come before the commission to request permission to so do through a NC:. You certainly can do a RFD on a parcel of land that you de not own. Cheryl Creighton asks if the abutters have been notifie=. Mr. Reade says the abutter notification is tied to the assessors and he doesn't know what the assessors show on t-~ parcels. Mr. Perry names the known owners. Ms. Andrews states objection to brushcutting on her property if it is in the proposal. Ms. Standley states this was in error and they will do =, NOI to delete the parcel from the request. Mr. Willet asks if the wetlands have been flagged. Ms. Standley states no, not yet. The schematic answers that need. They will flag before new activity on the property is commenced. Mr. Willet asks if she IS planning to continue brushcutting. Ms. Standley responds that the NOI requests to allow annual brushcutting of the property. But adds that before c~y further activity in the wetlands occur, they will stake the wetland and receive permission from the Commission. Mr. Perry questions not allowing a 25' buffer. ~ recycled paper Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission (508) 22;:<:2:30 10 South Beach Street Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for December 13, 1990 PagE :7 Mr. Willet wants some kind of buffer around the wetlanc. Ms. Standley asks what the commission wants flagged. - all places where edge of wetland has been cut or is propo5Ej to be cut will be staked and no work will be allowed. Mr. Willet comments that we are talking about hundreds feet. We want it flagged with a buffer of 25 feet as we require everybody else. Asks do we want some trails gOln; through the wetland tree areas blocked off. Ms. Standley states that she will be flagging the wetla-= areas that are adjacent to areas that are proposed to be Mr. Perry asks if it should be shown what wetland was filled without permits and what roads have crossed wetlancs without permission. Dr. Dunwiddie expreSSES a cbncern with culverts and roa:5 through the wetland. Cutting has already been done witho~: permits. The Commission needs to have the arEas that have had work occur filed for and properly permitted with schematics drawn for what wetlands have been filled. The wetland where the water level was artificially contained should be restored to its original condition ASAP. Cheryl Creighton comments she is glad it is more clear:. stated that work has been done. Many areas that are 1n violation require the wetlan~ flagging of the buffer zone. clearly mapped. It is possible that there are areas on 5:-e of the parcels that an agricultural management plan would :e a good tool but this needs to be worked through the Commission. The potential for pesticides, fertilizers, e::. and their effects on the wetlands need to be considered. There is a lot of consideration that needs to be given as :0 what type of activity is appropriate in the areas under o~- jurisdiction. She would like the commission to feel comfortable notifying other interest holders that they be made aware of the activity. She requests a map be made available to the Land Council. Dr. Dunwiddie suggests flagging might not be necessary :n the wetland edge on which no activity is planned, certair:. y recycled paper Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission (508) 228-7:2:30 10 South Beach Street Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for December 13, 1990 Page :3 within 25-50'. For instance a large area of undisturbed upland adjacent to the wetland could be omitted. Mr. Willet asks if there are any further questions. Dave Kingsley, reporter for the Nantucket Beacon, asks ~r~ a NOI was not filed before the work was done. Lisa Standley responds she doesn't know. MOTION: To continue for additional information was made and seconded. UNANIMOUS * 10.Cross - 32 Easton Street - (42.1.4-17) Present for the applicant is John Shugrue. Mr. Shugrue states this is a replacement bulkhead betwee~ Johnson and Cahill. Is in about the same shape as the othe~ two. If no one objects he suggests we close the hearing anc issue a standard order for plastic. Commission asks if this is just the bulkhead--no pier. Mr. Shugrue responds the pier and floats are already there. Mr. Shugrue requests Mr. Perry write up a standard order and continue the hearing for the DEP file number. MOTION: To continue for DEP file number and write a standard Order was made and seconded. UNANIMOUS * 11. Greenberg - 21 E. Tristram's Ave. SE48-557 (31-3) Present for the applicant are Attorney Philbrick and Mr. Shugrue. Mr. Perry summarizes the history. About a year ago the Commission allowed leach fields which were 100' from Mean @ recycled paper Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission (508) 228-~2:Y) 10 South Beach Street Nantucket. Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for December 13, 1990 Page _' High Tide and wetlands. The Health Department requires the: the leach trenches need to be 100' from the bank and that line would go to about the middle of the house. They had requested a minor modification to move the septic trenches, which would put them 100' from the wetland, which requires - waiver from our regulations. So it was not a minor modification and they are here to amend the order with a waiver allowing the leach fields within 100' of wetland. With that in mind, Mr. Perry has measured on the submitt~~ plans and found an area 100' from bank and 100' from wetlar: which satisfies both without a waiver. The house is more than 110' long and a waiver is not justified. Mr. Shugrue responds then we can't get the house on the lot. Commission agrees that the waiver lS not justified and suggests another house be designed. Mr. Perry mentions that there is now a wetland crosslng :: install the well line. He suggests that the trench should ~e dug with a ditch witch to minimize damage. After somE discussion the Commission suggests that the applicant address the issue when they come in with ~he revised house plan. MOTION: To continue for additional information was made and seconded. UNANIMOUS D. REGULAR MEETING 1. REQUEST FOR DETERMINATION - - a. Rauch - 84 Baxter Road - (49-37) 2 additions/deck Present for the applicant was Norm Chaleki. Mr. Perry states this was continued from the last meeting as there was a previous file that had some filing -- it. The old file permits much more than they are asking f:- A't :--l) recycled paper Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission (508) 228-7230 10 South Beach Street Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for December 13, 1990 Page 20 now. It permitted the same size addition but 2 story. The plan has been changed to add an 8' deck on the front instead of the 10' originally requested. The deck is the closest point and it is 40' from the wetland. Recommends a negative determination that the work is within the buffer zone. It was granted two years ago. The wetland boundary hasn't changed and no more dirt will be added around the house. Is within the buffer zone. Is a modest addition. MOTION: To issue a Negative Determination that the project is subject to but will not alter was made an seconded. UNANIMOUS * b. Andlinger - 72 Pocomo Road (15-37) - relocate drive Present for the applicant was Glen Wills of Nantucket Surveyors. Mr. Perry reviews the request wnich is to move the driveway. He walked the wetland boundary with Glen Wills. The proposed driveway is 102' away at the closest point. Commission comments it is out of our jurisdiction. Discussion on snow fence and the fact that the wind blows them down easily. MOTION: and seconded. To issue a negative determination was made UNANIMOUS * c. Perry - 873 S. Cambridge St - (59.4-133, 132) -house MOTION: To continue at the r-equest of the applicant and due to the lack of abutter notification. UNANIMOUS * d. Hoey - 61 Wanoma Way - (92-25, 11) - addition/septic @ recycled paper Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission (508) 228-7230 10 South Beach Street Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for December 13, 1990 Page 21 Present for the applicant is Attorney Philbrick and Bob Emack of Nantucket Surveyors. Commission states in the file are some elevations. Mr. Wasierski asks if the building is within 50' of the top of the bank. Attorney Philbrick asks if it were outside 50' would it make a difference. The Commissioners respond affirmatively. Attorney Philbrick asks if the Commission would be willing to issue a negative but won't alter on the condition that all the work will be 50' back; otherwise you want to see a NOI to get the determination. Commission asks where the deck is going. Also, how much excavating is to be done. Also, if the studio is to be above or below the garage. Mr. Perry asks what will be done with the dirt and comments that it should not be stockpiled as it will wash down the bank. Mr. Perry states he faxed a copy of the plans to Mr. Maguire who is a neighbor on the downside. He thought the house needed an addition and so is pleased. Mr. Perry recommends either hearing be continued for a set of plans that shows everything behind 50' or the determination be signed and held pending receipt of the revised plan. MOTION: To issue a subject to but will not alter negative determination and do not issue the Determination until the revised plans are received by the Commission was made and seconded. UNANIMOUS * e. Holch - 11 Wauwinet Road - (20-43) - detached shed Present for the applicant is Mr. Lindquist. @ recycled paper Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission (508) 228-72:3(1 10 South Beach Street Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for December 13, 1990 Page 22 Mr. Perry shows the as built for Hugret, the previous NOr on the lot. Request is to move a shed. Last spring we gavE them a partial compliance on the septic. He suggests we ask if it can be located within the existing footprint. The question is if he came for a determination to put a shed 30' from the wetland would we allow him to do it, if it wasn't there already. That is what we have to look at, he adds, not moving the existing shed around. Right now it is at 47'. But he doesn't see it as having a real impact on the wetland. Commission discusses shed location options and where cars will park. Mr. Lindquist states his first preference 1S to have it down by the driveway. Commission suggests Mr. Perry and Mr. Lindquist visit the site to decide on a location. MOTION: seconded. Continued for more information was made and UNANIMOUS 2. ORDER OF CONDITIONS a. Old North Wharf (Nautilus) - SE48-629 (42.3.1-225) Present for the applicant was Melissa Philbrick, counse I . Attorney Philbrick questioned #16 wording if it would preclude bulkhead repair of the existing bulkhead. Commission stated it would not preclude bulkhead repair. MOTION: To issue the Order as written was made and seconded. UNANIMOUS b. Fisher - 155 Wauwinet Road - SE48-632 (11-1) :~ recycled paper Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission (508) 228-7230 10 South Beach Street Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Me~ting Minutes for December 13, 1990 Paq~ MOTION: seconded. To issue the Order as written was made and UNANIMOUS c. Doubleday - Easton Street - SE48-625 (42.1.4-14,15) Present for the applicant was Glen Wills of Nantucket Surveyors and Melissa Philbrick. MOTION: To issue as written was made and seconded. UNANIMOUS 3. CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE a. Flamm - 43 Squam Road - SE48-451 (13-24) Mr. Willet reads the inspection report. Bushes have been planted in a disturbed area by the deck and the deck outside the shower area been removed. Also the requested conservation restriction which is intended to prohibit additional building has as yet not been placed on the property. He notes that the order expires the end of January. Attorney Philbrick states she is a little premature in asking for the certificate but they are in the process of working on the conservation restriction. She just wanted to make sure before any more time elapsed that the work done In the field is the right work and everyone is happy with it. Mr. Perry recommends the certificate not be issued tonight but notes the plantings are in compliance with the Commission's requests. MOTION: To continue to the January 17 hearing for additional information was made and seconded. UNANIMOUS b. Mellin - Sesachacha Pond - SE48-129 (24-5) Dr. Dunwiddie abstains from the vote. .~ recycled paper Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission (508) 228-723':' 10 South Beach Street Nantucket. Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for December 13, 1990 Page 2~ Mr. Perry summarizes the he, Mr. Wasierski and Mr. Visco met with Mrs. Claflin at the site and told her to remove the dirt and stake some hay bales around the pond and restore one small area to the left. Requested this be done before spring. He adds that they asked that once this had been done to call the Commission and they would decide if the area needs to be planted. d. Kessler - (92.4-303) 19 Wanoma Way - relocation septic Present for Mr. Kessler is Mr. Moretti. Mr. Perry reviews a request from Mr. Kessler for commission's opinion. Mr. Moretti says the plan is to replace a septic sY5te~ and under consideration by the Health Department is the possibility of putting 3 wells which include not only the well on Mr. Kessler's lot but the wells on the two abutting lots over the bank so they will not infringe on the well and septic system separation. Mr. Moretti adds the Board of Health requires a 10' setback from the front boundary for a septic system with a 100' separation between well and septic. Mr. Ray indicates he will recommend the Board grant a variance from the regulation but asks every other alternative be explored. Asks that the possibility of putting the wells below the bank be discussed with the Conservation Commission. If this is not something they can recommend, then he will recommend the variance for the 10' front yard setback to the Board. Mr. Perry shows the plot plan and how steep the bank is. Mr. Moretti asks that if it is the sense of the board to discourage locating 3 wells below the bank in this area, a letter be drafted to Richard Ray's attention and sent to h~m and he would then send it to Richard Ray. Commission asks what alternatives exist. Mr. Moretti shows the plan submitted by Nantucket Surveyors showing 100' separation between the existing well and the leach field. There are 3 wells currently located ~ recycled paper Town of Nantucket Conservation COlnrnission (508) 228-7230 10 South Beach Street Nantucket, Massaehusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for December 13, 1990 Page 24 Mr. Perry comments on the inspection report. He found the house was built as ordered but 2 sheds that are old and falling down were not removed. Feels there is no environmental impact. Dr. Dunwiddie feels they should be taken out as it lS part of the minutes and is on the plan. Commission agrees Mr. Perry should write a letter asking it be removed and requesting a time frame. MOTION: To table the request until the January 17 meeting and send a letter requesting additional compliance was made and seconded. UNANIMOUS 4. PLANNING BOARD REFERRAL a. Canapache Nominee Trust - Shawkemo Road Mr. Perry recommends a letter be sent to the Planning Board saying until we get a building envelope we cannot approve. c. Briar Patch - Quidnet cluster To be continued for a field inspection. 5. OTHER BUSINESS a. Siasconset Sewer Project discussion and minor mod. Request to remove from agenda. b. Taylor - Remove Enforcement Order Letter removing enforcement order prepared for commission signature; to be notarized. c. Claflin - 35 Wauwinet Rd. - SE48-584 (20-34)- violation @ recycled paper Town of Nantucket Conservation Comrnission (508) 228-7230 10 South Beach Street Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Meeting Minutes for Deceffiber 13, 1990 Page 26 above the bank and the septic location is up against the property line. Commission agrees that Mr. Perry will draft a letter to Board of Health to not allow the wells below the bank. MOTION: To not allow and so state in a letter was made and seconded. UNANIMOUS e. DEP Inspection of appeals: Monday, December 17, 9:45 AM Inspections scheduled are: Santa Rita Trust (appeal) Newquist (appeal) Madaket Bike Path replication area by dump 6. CORRESPONDENCE 7. MINUTES: for November 8 and November 29, 1990 MOTION: To accept the minutes with noted change was made and seconded. UNANIMOUS 8. BILLS TO BE PAID 9. FIELD INSPECTIONS - Wednesday, January 2, 1991, 3:30 pm The meeting was adjourned at 10:30. ,0'A \:JCf recycled paper