Loading...
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