HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-8-22Minutes for August 22, 2012, adopted Nov. 14
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
2 Bathing Beach Road
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
www.nantucket-ma.gov
Minutes for Wednesday, August 22, 2012
4:00 P.M. on the 2nd Floor of the Public Safety Facility 4 Fairgrounds Road
All or a portion of this meeting is being recorded.
If you plan to record this meeting yourself, please check with the chairman of the board before you begin.
This meeting is also being video recorded by NCTV, Channel 18.
Called to order at 4:00 p.m.
Staff in attendance: J. Carlson, Natural Resources Coordinator; Terry Norton, Nt uta Taker
Attending Members: Ernst Steinauer (Chair), Sarah Oktay (Vice chair), John Bra4torf-Smith, Andrew
Bennett, Ian Golding, Michael Glowacki
C_-
Absent Members: Jennifer Kerberg
rn
Agenda adopted by unanimous consent
rr,
-►
`D
rn
*Matter has not been heard
°
M
I. PUBLIC MEETING
=
,�
A. Public Comment - None
II. PUBLIC HEARING %r'
A. Notice of Intent
1. Nantucket Community Sailing -18 Wauwinet Road (20-13,14&16) SE48 -2452 (coot to 10/3)
2. Poster - 13 C Street (60.1.2 -76) SE48 -2472 (cont to 9/5)
3. Norwood Farm Trust - 243 Polpis Road (46 -1) SE48 -2473 (cont to 10/3)
(403 )
4. 74 West Chester Nominee Trust - 74 West Chester Street (41 -478) SE48 -2476
Sitting Steinauer, Oktay, Braginton- Smith, Bennett, Golding, Glowacki
Recused None
Documentation Supporting documents and plans.
Representative Paul Santos, Nantucket Surveyors - Renovate front dwelling and adding footage;
there will be work within 25 -foot buffer zone.
David M. Haines, Haines Hydrogeologic Consulting - Mitigation: five invasive
species removal plan explained and the restoration/planting plan. Open to
suggestions as to source of seeds.
Rick Beaudette, Vaughan, Dale and Hunter and Beaudette, P.C.
Public None
Discussion None
Staff Have everything needed to close.
Motion Motion to Close. ( Braginton- Smith) seconded
Vote Carried Unanimously
Page 1 of 10
Minutes for August 22, 2012, adopted Nov. 14
5. Flannery
— 62 Wanoma Way (92 -16) SE48 -2478
Sitting
Steinauer, Oktay, Braginton- Smith, Bennett, Golding, Glowacki
Recused
None
Documentation
Supporting documents and plans.
Representative
Brian Madden, Laurentide Environmental Consultants, Inc. — Septic upgrade.
underground cable through dune resource to a radar antenna. The antenna will
Existing path in proximity to west -side wetland's boundary will be left in place.
Public
None
Discussion
The path used to be a road and is evident back into the 70s from existing aerials;
electric cable seemed most ideal due to lack of grasses; want the cable out of sight.
Golding said the he used to drive the road in the 60s. Septic is outside the 100 -foot
Clifford A Goudey, Senior Engineer Resolute Marine Energy
buffer zone.
Staff
Asks for a letter for the records testifying that the septic is out of the buffer zone.
Motion
Motion to Close. (Bennett) seconded
Vote
Carried Unanimously
(4:zo)
6. Town of Nantucket — 7 Chicago Street (60 -123) SE48 -2477 (Water)
Sitting
Steinauer, Oktay, Braginton- Smith, Bennett, Golding, Glowacki
Recused
None
Documentation
Supporting documents and plans.
Representative
Stephen Barrett, Director Harris Miller Miller & Hanson Inc. — Wave energy, have a
buoy marking system and a person will be on island throughout the project.
Clifford A Goudey, Senior Engineer Resolute Marine Energy — A number of valves
will automatically shut off the flow of fluid in the event of a break in the line.
Public
None
Discussion
Beach protocols are designed to look at any changes in the beach during the process
— before and after profiles; will need a control to separate the affect of the wave
system from natural winter erosion. The fluid system will be a closed system; have
included data on LD50 in the reports submitted with the application. In the event of
severe weather, the system can be removed and redeployed.
Staff
Will include a condition the marks the location of the underwater cables.
Motion
Motion to Close. (Braginton- Smith) seconded
Vote
Carried Unanimously
7. *Town of Nantucket — 7 Chicago Street (60 -123) SE48 -2480 (Land)
Sitting
Steinauer, Oktay, Braginton- Smith, Bennett, Golding, Glowacki
Recused
None
Documentation
Supporting documents and plans.
Representative
Stephen Barrett, Director Harris Miller Miller & Hanson Inc. — 8X12 shed,
underground cable through dune resource to a radar antenna. The antenna will
forecast wave off shore for data collection purposes.
Anthony Kirincich, Ph.D. Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute — Burying the
electric cable seemed most ideal due to lack of grasses; want the cable out of sight.
Clifford A Goudey, Senior Engineer Resolute Marine Energy
Public
None
Discussion
Environmentally sensitive piles upon which the shed will set; sill plate to be high
enough not to leave foot print; shed will be in place about a year. Cable will be hand
dug 6 — 12 inches below surface. Will be tying into transformer left after a house was
removed from land trust property.
Staff
Can condition height above ground of the shed.
Motion
Motion to Close. (Braginton- Smith) seconded
Vote
Carried Unanimously
Page 2 of 10
Minutes for August 22, 2012, adopted Nov. 14
8. *CMDM,
LLC — 93 and 99 Eel Point Road (30 -9 &10) SE48-
Sitting
Steinauer, Oktay, Braginton- Smith, Bennett, Golding, Glowacki
Recused
None
Documentation
Supporting documents and plans.
Representative
Bill Hunter, Vaughan, Dale and Hunter and Beaudette, P.C. — Provide a background
overview. Ask for continuance.
Arthur D. Gasbarro, Blackwell and Associates Inc — Describe construction
methodology.
Lee L Weishar, Ph.D., PWS, Senior Scientist/Coastal Engineer Woods Hole Group —
Answer questions expressed under previous application.
Public
Martha Cunningham, 103 Eel Point Road — In the past dirt instead of sand was used
and killed the mole crabs; another time sand was removed from my property. In the
past machinery driving along the beach left the sand compacted by the machinery.
Don't think annual monitoring will be enough.
Emily MacKinnon, Nantucket Land Council — Argue that the assemblage of
materials is in fact a coastal structure. Wonder at the erosion rates since 2008.
Discussion
Hunter — Trying to identify a possible illicit species on the beach; that information
should be available at next meeting. Evidence shows the main house was renovated
as opposed to being a new structure. What is being proposed is in fact not a coastal
engineering structure. Proposing temporary use of sand - filled bags, which do not
constitute a structure but provides protection to the coastal bank. 2008 permit that is
in place provides for the fence, the nourishment, jute bagging and planting beach
grass. Over four years of the permit, which has not worked, the owner has spent over
$1 M to implement the order of condition in response to numerous erosion events.
The unpermitted structure was erected to mitigate the erosion. Now have a permit
request that should have been made in lieu of the unpermitted wall, which has been
removed.
Oktay — In past this commission has been considering double fence rows to be a
structure.
Gasbarro — Top of plan is a detail of what is proposed. Drift fence in zig -zag exists.
Propose to install an additional picket fence behind the existing and parallel to the
bank. There will be support piling at each apex of the front fence; would install piling
at rear fence. This provides stability for the three rows of coir tubes. Three staggered
rows of sand -filled tubes will be placed behind second fence; they will be tied to
stainless steel anchors driven into the bank; overall is covered with sacrificial sand.
Material access will be by means of and existing driveway. There will be a machine
on beach brought on at 40th pole. Overall will be planted with American beach grass.
At eastern end, project will come to the property line which will soon include the
paper road Tristram Avenue. This type of structure absorbs energy and reduces the
amount of scour. Will propose an annual report and survey 150 feet either end of the
structure along the beach.
Weisher — Erosion data indicates long -term erosion rates are 1.4 feet per year; for 54
years, erosion rates are just under a foot a year. Beach access at high tide, would
maintain a ledge and sand ramp. Impact of project on neighbors, committed to
providing sand as required along with a monitoring plan; if the project is having an
adverse impact, it can be cut back. Jute does not have a good design life; it does not
have tensile strength; sand can be packed back into the coir bags. Release rate of
sand, from records done for'Sconset Beach Preservation Fund, about 52 cubic feet of
sand per bag. High replenishment rate is due to maintaining the toe of the bank. Sea -
level rates are debatable, no concrete data on that but estimates are less than the
width of a nickel. Data on existing storms, severe storms strike 4 -5 times a year when
surges are above high -tide level. Erosion rate since 2008 has been zero.
Page 3 of 10
Minutes for August 22, 2012, adopted Nov. 14
Discussion Oktay — Figure 12, 13 and 14 are storm surge for 2010 & 2011; would it be helpful
continued to see any before or more recently?
Documentation Supporting documents and plans and powerpoint.
Representative Barry Fogel, Keegan Werlin LLP — Review of project scope on this Notice of Intent
(NOI). Reviewing what is different about this NOI from previous application.
Steven Cohen, Reade Gullicksen Hanley & Gifford LLP
Arthur Reade, Reade Gullicksen Hanley & Gifford LLP
Jamie Feeley, Cottage and Castle Inc.
Les Smith, Environmental Scientist Epsilon Associates Inc.
Brian Jones, Regional Director Ocean and Coastal Consultants
Public Joshua Posner, 77 Baxter Road
Emily MacKinnon, Nantucket Land Council
John Ramsey, Applied Coastal Engineering
D. Anne Atherton
Bruce Perry, Third -party Consultant Conservation Commission
Discussion Fogel — A question raised was that a similar project was declined; how can this be
defined differently? The scale & bank stability have been addressed. Permit for a
wetland project is an order of conditions; a project meets the standards if it satisfies
those standards. This NOI defines how it will meet performance standards.
Steinauer — Concerned about voting on this when one of the commissioners has not
sat through the entire presentation.
Glowacki — Have familiarity with project so am comfortable with normal
proceedings; see no need to go slide by slide.
Steinauer — Would like Ms Karberg to be present for the vote.
Page 4 of 10
Fogel — are not seeing a trend, it is just representative of what it occurs. Happens
about 3 -5 times a year.
Golding — There has not been a 3 -day Nor'easter in that time.
Oktay — Patriots Day 2007 was the last big storm and another in 2009. Also, Does
this require a corps of engineers permit?
Staff — More than likely not as there is no work below the high water mark.
Gasbarro — Mean high -water line is shown on the plan. And no vehicle will go
below that line.
Steinauer — Climate change material, even if sea level isn't rising, there is an
increase in the intensity of storms and would like to know how that will be addressed.
Will want failure criteria and the removal protocol and impact on neighboring
properties.
Oktay — Official estimate of sea level rise is available.
Weisher — Do not believe the life of the project would be affected by the sea level
rise. Limits are 1.3 millimeters with a radical maximum of 6 feet, which is very
dubious.
Staff
Abutter's notifications had the correct date. Newspaper published the wrong date.
Motion
Continued without objection to Sept. 5.
Vote
N/A
Break 5.55 to 6M
9. Sconset Beach Preservation Fund — Baxter Road (48 -8) SE48 -2474
Sitting
Steinauer, Oktay, Braginton- Smith, Bennett, Golding, Glowacki
Recused
None
Documentation Supporting documents and plans and powerpoint.
Representative Barry Fogel, Keegan Werlin LLP — Review of project scope on this Notice of Intent
(NOI). Reviewing what is different about this NOI from previous application.
Steven Cohen, Reade Gullicksen Hanley & Gifford LLP
Arthur Reade, Reade Gullicksen Hanley & Gifford LLP
Jamie Feeley, Cottage and Castle Inc.
Les Smith, Environmental Scientist Epsilon Associates Inc.
Brian Jones, Regional Director Ocean and Coastal Consultants
Public Joshua Posner, 77 Baxter Road
Emily MacKinnon, Nantucket Land Council
John Ramsey, Applied Coastal Engineering
D. Anne Atherton
Bruce Perry, Third -party Consultant Conservation Commission
Discussion Fogel — A question raised was that a similar project was declined; how can this be
defined differently? The scale & bank stability have been addressed. Permit for a
wetland project is an order of conditions; a project meets the standards if it satisfies
those standards. This NOI defines how it will meet performance standards.
Steinauer — Concerned about voting on this when one of the commissioners has not
sat through the entire presentation.
Glowacki — Have familiarity with project so am comfortable with normal
proceedings; see no need to go slide by slide.
Steinauer — Would like Ms Karberg to be present for the vote.
Page 4 of 10
Minutes for August 22, 2012, adopted Nov. 14
Discussion Oktay — 81 Baxter has been substantially improved per local regulations, which is
continued the center property. Can make failure criteria more stringent. There are still a lot of
truck trips needed for construction and replenishment; and know how often the
replenishment trips will happen. This smaller footprint doesn't really protect Baxter
Road so protection of infrastructure is a weak argument; and a question is how
valuable is 400 feet of Baxter Road.
Golding — Reclamation bond should be for the life of the project.
Feeley — Need a specific date for surety of the bond.
Folger — Could make a condition of replacing the 3 -year bond in perpetuity.
Oktay — Who compensates the neighbors for loss of land?
Posner — With the terracing, there was no evidence of erosion occurring at a faster
rate than normal. People along the bank are anxious to see how this works; the bluff
is being destroyed one house at a time.
Folger — Don't need to add to the escrow, just need to add failure criteria.
Steinauer — This commission has the opportunity to add criteria. Everything is based
on these three lots, my concerns go past these three lots and need a criterion that
looks at affect either side of the project and impact upon the larger scale. This is a
chance for the commission to gather a lot of data for future reference.
Folger — One of the key points of this project is to protect from the 100 year storm,
not just the toe.
Posner — Could add that if erosion is occurring at a more rapid rate than other un-
protected areas; that would be evidence of end scour.
Cohen — ConCom can add or change criteria during the life of the project.
Oktay — Of the two or three types of projects this commission has allowed, want to
know how those have fared.
Bennett — Above 28 feet, existing plantings need to be left alone.
Oktay — Would like to see photos documenting the current conditions from the front
view and horizontal as well as at points over the life of the project.
Folger — Vegetation will be removed up to the 28 -foot level. No one has written up
the test projects for coastal management on Nantucket.
Steinauer — If this is a pilot project, how long does it have to be in place before it is
considered successful and what does that mean for the rest of the bluff face? Do not
want to see more applications before ConCom knows that this is going to work. This
was put before Town Meeting as an experimental project, and want assurance that
this commission is going to see that it works before someone else comes in with a
similar application.
Reade — This Commission should not look favorably upon another application until
this project has time to prove whether or not it works. Selectmen have controls over
the project.
Steinauer — As this is an experimental pilot project, it is in many ways out of our
hands and is up to other regulatory boards.
Oktay — Need clarification of trickle rate of water through gabions.
McKinnon — Speaking to the way the hearing is progressing, some of the public has
not had a chance to go through the files have to depend upon what is presented at this
hearing. A lot of the information in the PowerPoint was not included in the file
information.
Folger — The NOI is available through the office and from my office. Everything
except failure criteria is in the NOI.
Reade — In the interest of time, we did not want to reiterate details that are in the
NOI.
Page 5 of 10
Minutes for August 22, 2012, adopted Nov. 14
Discussion
Ramsey — Review questions from previous proposal that were never answered: First
continued
bank material, 13 percent is not compatible and that is why it is not being mitigated
for; the State requires that anything that is eroded is mitigated regardless of
compatibility; 1.7 cubic yards of linear foot per year would be the annual mitigation
volume. Another issue is the long -term monitoring surveys, would like those
conducted under direct supervision by a licensed engineer or surveyor. There are a lot
of criteria for monitoring and mitigation, as a basis the volumes need to be based on
the historical data and must address the entire system. Monitoring should be tailored
for this small project. Would like to see literature on wave reflection off gabion and
mattress structures. High tide line is in the Army Corps of Engineering jurisdiction;
need to know whether or not this structure intrudes upon that. Don't see the need for
the gabions.
Folger — Information on bank material and Woods Hole Group (WHG) monitoring
are in the NOI. Wave reflection through this system is an issue that was addressed
and provided in the NOI. Terrace function and addition of volume was in a table
provided to the commission.
Staff — There is a lot of information provided for the previous NOI. If a question is
asked addressing the information, it needs to be resubmitted to become part of this
active NOI.
Steinauer — At what point does this encroach upon Army Corps of Engineering
jurisdiction?
Feeley — Filter fabric, water will percolate through the filter fabric slowly. In a heavy
rain fall or high storm surge that causes extensive water runoff coming down below
the mattresses, the gabions help prevent that undercutting erosion.
Glowacki — Anticipate there will be a point when this commission is sorting through
the information and further questions will come up. Would appreciate groups that
have questions submit those in writing to get them into the record. That allows
everyone the opportunity to review them before the meeting.
Folger — Ask anyone with written comments to get them to staff a week before the
packet goes out to allow time to give the applicant time to respond.
Atherton — Did not see in the new NOI an alternative analysis, which is necessary to
complete the record to show there is no viable alternative.
Folger — That is "Attachment E ".
Perry — Lack of scale misrepresents the project. Would like an actual cross section of
the bank and the conditions. What happens to the excavated soil: where it will be
stored during construction and how it will be kept in the system? Contour map is
from 2010; would like diagram showing a more current contours of the bluff.
Folger — All sheets and profiles are to scale. Can provide a larger scale.
Bennett — Seaward extent of the hill, mean high tide level is at elevation 4.75. That
leaves a 5 -foot wide beach.
Staff
Proceedings are dependent upon the comfort level of the commissioners. Would
prefer all seven commissioners were present for the vote. One benefit for this being
on town property, this commission can refuse to hear another project proposed on
town property; also, there is a moratorium in place. If a NOI is applied for, it has to
be dealt with through the hearing process. It would be up to this applicant to talk with
other residents along Baxter Road and provide ConCom with assurances that no other
applications will be brought before the commission. Will post the PowerPoint
presentation to the web. It is incumbent upon the members of the public to access the
available information and to become familiar with the project.
Motion
Continued without objection to Sept. 5.
Vote
N/A
Page 6 of 10
Minutes for August 22, 2012, adopted Nov. 14
B. Amended Orders of Conditions
(7:35)
1. *Badger and Dexter — 91 West Chester Street (41 -827) SE48 -2421
Sitting Steinauer, Oktay, Braginton- Smith, Bennett, Golding, Glowacki
Recused None
Documentation Supporting documents and plans.
Representative Arthur D. Gasbarro, Blackwell and Associates Inc. — Changes to the approved
structure to reduce its size and modify position and landscape.
Public None
Discussion Gasbarro — Structures remain outside 100 -foot buffer. A sewer grinder pump will be
outside the 25 -foot buffer. Existing driveway is within the 25 -foot buffer. Moving an
accessory structure to other side of the property.
Staff Close and issue
Motion Motion to Issue amended order. (Braginton- Smith) seconded
Vote Carried Unanimously
III. PUBLIC MEETING
A. Requests for Determination of Applicability
1. Town of Nantucket — 7 Chicago Street (60 -123)
Sitting
Steinauer, Oktay, Braginton- Smith, Bennett, Golding, Glowacki
Recused
None
Documentation
Supporting documents and plans.
Representative
None
Public
None
Discussion
None
Staff
Received a written request to withdraw.
Motion
Motion to Approve withdrawl. (Bennett) seconded
Vote
Carried Unanimously
(7:42)
2. *96 Squam Road LLC — 96 Squam Road (12 -33)
Sitting
Steinauer, Oktay, Braginton- Smith, Bennett, Golding, Glowacki
Recused
None
Documentation
Supporting documents and plans.
Representative
Arthur D. Gasbarro, Blackwell and Associates Inc. — Install a new drinking water
well and septic pump within the 50 -foot buffer. The new septic is outside the 100 -
foot zone.
Public
None
Discussion
None
Staff
Verified the wetlands. Recommend issue Positive 2 to verify wetland and Negative 3
Motion
Motion to Issue as amended. (Braginton- Smith) seconded
Vote
Carried Unanimously
Page 7 of 10
Minutes for August 22, 2012, adopted Nov. 14
3. *Wills, F.T. — 5 Pilgrim Road (41 -217)
Sitting
Steinauer, Oktay, Braginton- Smith, Bennett, Golding, Glowacki
Recused
None
Documentation
Supporting documents and plans.
Representative
Staff in lieu of representative — clear brush.
Public
None
Discussion
Oktay — Need to condition that no cutting is done within the 50 -foot buffer.
Steinauer — If going to put conditions on it, need to look at it.
Staff
Recommend issue with Positive 2 to verify the border of vegetative wetlands &
Negative 3 that the work is within the buffer zone and does not require filing.
Motion
Motion to Issue as recommended. (Glowacki) seconded
Vote
Carried 4 -2/ Oktay & Steinauer opposed
(7:51)
4. *Bosco —
26 West Chester Street (42.4.3 -56)
Sitting
Steinauer, Oktay, Braginton- Smith, Bennett, Golding, Glowacki
Recused
None
Documentation
Supporting documents and plans.
Representative
Staff in lieu of representative — An addition on west side that straddles the 100 zone.
Lawn is inside the 50 -foot zone.
Public
None
Discussion
None
Staff
Verified wetlands line. Issue a positive 4 for work in the buffer zone requiring NOI
Motion
Motion to Issue as a positive requiring NOI. (Glowacki) seconded
Vote
Carried Unanimously
B. Minor Modifications
(7:54)
1. *Nantucket Conservation Foundation — 183,185 &187 Eel Pt Rd (33 -1 -3) SE48 -2319
Sitting
Steinauer, Oktay, Braginton- Smith, Bennett, Golding, Glowacki
Recused
None
Documentation
Supporting documents and plans.
Representative
Staff in lieu of representative — On rusty willow and phragmites. Want to modify the
orders of condition to allow painting woody stumps with Renovate3®.
Public
None
Discussion
Oktay — Would like a protocol provided.
Steinauer — Uncomfortable with allowing them to precede carte blanche.
Staff — Land Bank uses 5 percent on woody species; but don't know if he uses it as a
pain.
Steinauer — Land Bank uses 5 percent in spray, which is way lower than paint.
Renovate38 is a triclopyr They are using more like 45 percent, but if undiluted is
what is needed then that's what's needed.
Glowacki — Bound by licensing to use it as regulated.
Staff
Will add that they need to go by the recommended rates on the fact sheets.
Motion
Motion to Approve per staff recommendation. (Bennett) seconded
Vote
Carried Unanimously
Page 8 of 10
Minutes for August 22, 2012, adopted Nov. 14
C. Certificates of Compliance
(8:01)
3. *Flannery
1. *Playe —
5 California Ave. (60.3.1 -448, 60.2.4- 37 &38) SE48 -2251
Sitting
Steinauer, Oktay, Braginton- Smith, Bennett, Golding, Glowacki
Recused
None
Documentation
Supporting documents and plans.
Representative
None
Public
None
Discussion
Installation of septic system.
Staff
It is in compliance.
Motion
Motion to Issue. ( Oktay) seconded
Vote
Carried Unanimously
D. Orders of Conditions (If the public hearing is closed — for discussion and /or issuance)
(8:03)
1. *Nantucket Conservation Foundation — 2 Squidnet Way (Squam Farm) SE48 -2475
Sitting Steinauer, Oktay, Braginton- Smith, Bennett, Golding, Glowacki
Recused None
Documentation Supporting documents and plans.
Representative None
Public None
Discussion Steinauer — Believe we should allow them to pull weeds. Perhaps should add
triclopyr to be used according to directions.
Staff Should include the species specific management plan. Condition 23 requires that all
species to be removed are identified as on the invasive species list. Add triclopyr
under Condition 19.
Motion Motion to Issue as amended. (Braginton- Smith) seconded
Vote Carried Unanimously
2. *74 West Chester N.T. — 74 West Chester St. (41 -478) SE48 -2476
Sitting Steinauer, Oktay, Braginton- Smith, Bennett, Golding, Glowacki
Recused None
Documentation Supporting documents and plans.
Representative None
Public None
Discussion Oktay — Should include reestablishment of buffer zone and removal of invasive
species.
Staff Should include the species specific management plan. Condition 23 requires that all
species to be removed are identified as on the invasive species list.
Motion Motion to Issue as amended. (Braginton- Smith) seconded.
Vote Carried 5- 1 / /Glowacki opposed
(8:12)
3. *Flannery
— 62 Wanoma Way (92 -16) SE48 -2478
Sitting
Steinauer, Oktay, Braginton- Smith, Bennett, Golding, Glowacki
Recused
None
Documentation
Supporting documents and plans.
Representative
None
Public
None
Discussion
None
Staff
No waivers were required and soil erosion is outside jurisdiction.
Motion
Motion to Issue. ( Oktay) seconded
Vote
Carried Unanimously
Page 9 of 10
Minutes for August 22, 2012, adopted Nov. 14
4. *Town of Nantucket — 7 Chicago Street (60 -123) SE48 -2477 (Water)
Sitting
Steinauer, Oktay, Braginton- Smith, Bennett, Golding, Glowacki
Recused
None
Documentation
Supporting documents and plans.
Representative
None
Public
None
Discussion
Oktay — Want photos documenting conditions before and after.
Staff
Added monitoring provision included and request for written notice before removal
and mark location of the system and cable in water as recommend by USCG. Applied
for waiver under the no adverse /no reasonable alternative provision; but will grant a
waiver to a land under the ocean provision for work within the buffer zone. The other
two are for the coastal beach and coastal bank for work in the coastal beach and
coastal bank. Include before and after photos of the land.
Motion
Motion to Issue as amended. (Golding) seconded
Vote
Carried Unanimously
(8 16)
5. *Town of Nantucket — 7 Chicago Street (60 -123) SE48- 2480 (Land)
Sitting
Steinauer, Oktay, Braginton- Smith, Bennett, Golding, Glowacki
Recused
None
Documentation Supporting documents and plans.
Representative None
Public None
Discussion None
Staff Number 19 to include photos showing before and after and addition of a minimum
height of 1 foot above the dune for the shed.
Motion Motion to Issue as amended. (Braginton- Smith) seconded
Vote Carried Unanimously
6. Discussion of other closed notice of intent public hearings
E. Other Business
1. Reports:
i. Project Reports — 15 East Tristam's Ave. (30 -4) SE48 -705 Arthur D. Gasbarro, Blackwell and
Associates Inc — Coastal Bluff protection. Read letter into the record. Review process for placing
materials and no machine or material will be stored on the beach. Plans and aerials provided. As long
as there is no expansion or additional construction, will be maintaining what is there. This is an old
permit that requires continuing reporting. Motion to Approve. Carried unanimously
ii. CPC — Glowacki
iii. NP &EDC — Bennett
iv. Mosquito Control Committee — Braginton -Smith
v. Coastal Management Plan — Oktay
vi. Other /Miscellaneous Reports: Harbor Shellfish Board — Glowacki
2. Commissioners Comment - None
3. Administrator:
i. Staff Report - None
ii. Approval of Minutes - None
IV. PUBLIC HEARING
A. Town of Nantucket Wetlands Protection Regulations — Held
Motion to Adjourn at 8:30
Submitted by:
Terry L. Norton
Page 10 of 10