voices: the community speaks of Nantucket and GHYC

CONCERNED CITIZENS AND FRIENDS OF THE
UNION STREET/WASHINGTON STREET EXTENSION NEIGHBORHOOD

c/o Robert Paterson - 70 Union Street and
Jim Nettles, 64 Union Street, Nantucket MA. 02554

June 7, 2004

VIA FACSIMILE

Town of Nantucket Planning Board
Donald Visco, Chairman
Frank Spriggs, Vice Chairman
Joanne Holdgate
Sylvia Howard
John McLaughlin
Barry Rector
1 East Chestnut Street
Nantucket MA 02554

Town of Nantucket Historic District Commission
Dirk Roggeveen, Chairman
Linda Williams, Vice Chair
Dawn Hill, Secretary
John McLaughlin
Valerie Norton
Town Building Annex, 2nd Floor
37 Washington Street
Nantucket MA 02554

Town of Nantucket Conservation Commission
Archibald McColl, Chairman
Clark Whitcomb, Vice Chairman
Virginia Andrews
Michael Glowacki
Peter Hull
Albert J. Manning
Bruce Perry
Peggy Fantozzi, Consultant
1st Floor Town Building Annex
37 Washington Street
Nantucket, MA 02554

Re: Great Harbor Yacht Club

Dear Commissioners and Board Members:

On behalf of the Concerned Citizens and Friends of the Union Street/Washington Street Extension Neighborhood, we are corresponding with each member of the three Nantucket agencies which have the daunting task of reviewing various aspects of applications by persons and entities hoping to develop and construct the Great Harbor Yacht Club (GHYC).

One comparison is revealing Ð the proposed 25 sq. mile wind farm in Nantucket Sound represents the use of public water areas for developer profit. Likewise, we view the GHYC similarly, taking over public water areas (51 slips and pier, for example) which they do not own.

At the conclusion of a meeting of the Planning Board on Wednesday, June 2, counsel for GHYC asked the Board to please provide a list of its objections and/or concerns to the latest iteration of the plans (and now a model) of the proposed project. What follows is our groupÕs list of our concerns and objections for your review. These relate to the Environment, Public Safety, the Integrity of the Neighborhood and the Preservation of the Island. We thank you in advance for any and all consideration which you give to the fears and objections which follow:

• The proposed activities at the GHYC, including late night traffic, lights and noise, may adversely affect shore birds, ducks, horseshoe crabs and other marine life which live in the marsh. Also, because of dredging and other aspects of the GHYC plans which intrude into the water, we fear that sensitive eelgrass, home to marine life including scallops, may be destroyed. Nantucket's Town biologist has confirmed these adverse affects. Noise and light are of significant concern. The constant humming of electric motors operating compressors and condensers as well as other HVAC related equipment would, in our opinion. constitute an unwanted disturbance of this fragile habitat.


• The storm water management scheme of the GHYC project was to channel storm water into the Town-owned wetlands -- and now into the harbor. Run-off from the proposed operations and uses on the premises of this project will involve oil, gasoline and diesel fuel and all may be caught up in storm water run off. GHYC should handle its storm water on its own property.


• The GHYC plans call for demolition of the buildings which comprise the existing 87 year old boatyard. The site of that boatyard has witnessed and been burdened with nearly a century of marine operations likely involving uses of lead, copper, varnishes, stains, solvents, paints, gasoline, oil and other contaminants. This may be a hazardous waste site of immense proportions and disturbing it without extreme caution could open a 'Pandora's box' of pollutants into the harbor, the eelgrass, the salt marshes and the wetlands. Recently noted at a meeting of the Con Com was a CommissionerÕs suggestion that perhaps some actual core testing and analysis need to be performed. Looking at a DEP file containing data derived from a spill response should provide no comfort whatsoever to the reasonable fears that naturally arise from an understanding of the operations of this boatyard for over eighty years. If contamination is found that alone may be sufficient reason for denying a change of use which poses a significant threat to our Island.


• The Union Street/Washington Street neighborhood is a main thoroughfare to and from Nantucket's steamship authority port. Everything that unloads (fuel, building materials, food, etc.) passes by truck along Washington Street and Union Street to the rest of the Island. The proposed GHYC project will add hundreds of cars, not to mention boat trailers and trucks, to an already overburdened road system. The effects will be disastrous. Likewise, parking will inevitably spill over into the neighborhood where parking spaces already are scarce. Jim Nettles and others have bitterly complained that nearly 1000 additional cars per day driving past their homes will constitute a complete interference with their quiet enjoyment of their properties. The GHYC developers' traffic and parking studies are seriously flawed. For example, their traffic study operates from a premise of four persons in each vehicle - not a reality. Also, there are several proposed uses for which parking data has simply not been provided - moorings, valet boat service and the public business of GLM. How many parking spaces will these uses require?


• Nantucket does not allow new construction within 50 feet of a wetland area. These plans call for major construction well within 50 feet, thereby defeating the intent of the legislation -- to protect the wetlands. A waiver has been requested. Because the developers propose to demolish the existing boatyard buildings and to build new structures bearing no relationship to the size and/or footprint of the previous structures, a waiver under these circumstances is not possible. Moreover, the applicable Rules require that in order for there to be consideration of a waiver, the applicant must demonstrate that the proposed structure is no more detrimental than the existing structure. Based on size and hours of operation alone, such proof is not possible.


• Great Harbor Yacht Club is a Major Commercial Development, which has swelled to encompass a total land area of almost 3.5 acres. The neighborhood is Residential/Commercial. The enormity of the proposed GHYC will drastically change the neighborhood and 'scale' and any residential flavor will be forever lost. No one of the three agencies to whom this list is being sent has the authority to approve such a change.


• Page 66 of Building with Nantucket in Mind, (BWNM), in a section titled, Typical Pedestrian Scale, states, "Any new construction in the town should be of a scale compatible with that of adjacent buildings. Also the scale of spaces between buildings should be carefully considered." What is proposed clearly violates the foregoing admonition.

Clubhouse:

1. The building that currently occupies most of the site of this proposed new Clubhouse is a boatyard building which is 50' x 120'. The new clubhouse building is 55'-90' x 245'; not in keeping with current massing, scale or historic pattern. This is an overall increase from approximately 6,000 sf of space, to over 20,000 sf of space; more than three times the current structure.
2. Flat roofs are not allowed.
3. No photos of existing structures being replaced have been submitted to the HDC with this file to allow a comparison of existing structures with the proposed project.
4. No plans were submitted which indicate site grading, retaining walls, landscape features, or paving surfaces for review or approval.
5. There should be careful consideration of site lighting since this location has a very high visibility and impact on the harbor and neighborhood.
6. The first floor elevation for the structure is 12.2', almost 5' above existing grade. We understand that this is a V zone and therefore requires a finish floor (top of slab at 10'-0") . The reason the developer is at elevation 12.2' is to use wood frame construction and mechanicals below the floor. Could you imagine the steamship office being built 5' above the pier that it is on?
7. No dumpster area, air-handling units-condensers are indicated. We believe early conversations mentioned the roof area.

Poolhouse:

1. The application does not match the plans which were submitted. Plans are incorrect if 3' of fill is being added on North and East. The application also states that 3'-0' of foundation is exposed not shown on plans.
2. The Second floor deck does not meet guidelines.
3. No plans were submitted which indicate site grading, retaining walls, landscape features, or paving surfaces for review or approval.
4. The proposed structure will form a larger street massing than currently exists and totally eliminate public water views as mentioned at the Nantucket Conservation Commission.
5. Commissioner John McLaughlin was correct when he raised the question about the shingles going to the ground. This application is incorrectly drawn, as are all others in this regard.
6. The first floor elevation of this structure is 10.2 which is almost 4' above the street, The required floor elevation is 9' based on FEMA. This structure could employ barricades such as were used at Henry's on Broad street and retain its Street character, scale and pedestrian relationships.

Pool:

1. This application is incomplete. The difference between existing and proposed grade is left blank. The site plan for the project indicates a finished pool deck of elevation 8.0. The existing grades in this area range from elevation 6.0 to 7.0 or 2' to 3' of added fill.
2. Pool decks are indicated on the plans with a total area of 64' x 94'. The application is incomplete and no reference is made to this proposed elevated area.
3. Required fencing has not been indicated or defined and is required by law.
4. No plans were submitted which indicate site grading, retaining walls, landscape features, or paving surfaces for review or approval.
5. There is no requirement that a swimming pool needs to be at elevation 8' and we suggest that this be considered at grade.

Sports Barn/ Marina Building:

1. On the application, the existing to proposed grade is incorrect per the site plan submitted.
2. The main roof pitch (4/12) does not meet OHD guidelines.
3. The 10,153 sf ground cover will be 10' or less from the closest abutter whose structure is 1,800 sf of ground cover. This is not in keeping with the surrounding area or size and scale of this well established neighborhood.
4. At the Planning Board, the developer represented that the Grey Lady Marine facility will be moving to Arrowhead Drive. The GHYC plans had called for a 1,600 sf structure to provide minimal simple one day repairs. The current plans call for a 5,000+ sf boat repair/maintenance and storage building. This type of structure for interior boat rack storage does not exist in the OHD and is more appropriate by design and scale at the new GLM.
5. The Marina Building is at elevation 6.8', a few inches above grade.
6. There is parking planned for an area behind this building The parking site, in part, is the current location of the former Ramos home at 11 Salt Marsh Way. The Ramos home constituted a residential use in a historic neighborhood. A clearing of homes in a historic district for the creation of a parking lot. is in direct conflict with BWNM and should be discouraged.

• This project will require Chapter 91 authorization which will mean public hearings and many assurances concerning public access. At the most recent meeting of the Planning Board, the developer demonstrated partial public access ending on the beach; totally unsatisfactory and totally not in compliance with the requirements of Article 91. It is unclear from the latest version of the plans exactly where, if anywhere, public walkways will be built. Moreover, it has been acknowledged by the ConCom that because of the applicability of Chapter 91 if, for example, permission were to be granted for the demolition of the existing boatyard buildings, nothing could occur, absolutely nothing, unless and until Chapter 91 approval had been given by the State of Massachusetts. Finally, the proposed GHYC will negatively affect public access to boat launchings and the marine lift Ð again triggering Chapter 91.


• Also, the proposed removal and relocation of the travel lift and boat hoist require Chapter 91 approval before any work commences. Obviously, any approval by the Planning Board, which we trust will not be forthcoming, would be conditioned upon the approval of the State of Massachusetts and, as discussed below, the Secretary of the Army.


• At the last meeting of the Conservation Commission when we brought up the potential 'PandoraÕs Box' of hazardous materials that may exist beneath the current boatyard site, the consultant to the Con Com advised that it was not the Con ComÕs responsibility to protect and preserve the environment of Nantucket. She advised that our concerns about hazardous materials were the province of the Health Department. We respectfully suggest that Ms. Fantozzi carefully review the Mission Statement of the Conservation Commission which states in pertinent part, "The CommissionÕs protected interests of public and private ground water protection, prevention of pollution, erosion control and storm damage prevention provide great benefit to the TownÕs seasonal and year around economy." The fact is that on this site only ground water samples were tested. There has been absolutely no analysis of what we believe are 87 years of hazardous materials in the soil


• Regulations governing the Army Corps of Engineers require that portions of the GHYC plan be reviewed and authorized pursuant to USCA 33 Section 403 which states, " The creation of any obstruction . . . to the navigable capacity of any of the waters of the United States is prohibited; and it shall be unlawful to build . . . any wharf, pier, dolphin, boom, weir, breakwater, bulkhead, jetty or other structure in any port, roadstead, haven, harbor, . . . or other water of the United States . . . except on plans recommended by the Chief of Engineers and authorized by the Secretary of the Army . . . " Therefore, GHYC may not proceed without such approval. Also, the proposed dredging of a new channel to a depth of 7 feet at mean low water must receive Corps of Engineers approval. We have already been in contact with the Secretary of the Army.
• As a harbor of refuge, Nantucket must maintain its capability for hauling deep draught craft in a threat of storm situation. Both the Harbor Master and the United States Coast Guard must affirm that sufficient storm contingency plans are in place pursuant to GHYCÕs plans regarding the marine travel lift prior to there being any dredging , demolition or relocation of any element of the current capability.


• Public safety also is a compelling factor weighing against approval of this project. The enormous traffic congestion of an already overburdened Union Street/Francis Street/Washington Street Extension, as previously discussed, will surely interfere with the travel of emergency vehicles and especially fire department equipment needing to reach dwellings in Town. As currently designed it appears that fork lift equipment will be required to traverse Washington Street Ext. frequently Ð a very dangerous scenario.

In conclusion, we contemplate that we will surely be adding to this list; but it is a beginning. We have shared many of these concerns with the Massachusetts Congressional delegation, our State government representatives, Governor Romney, the Massachusetts DEP, the Secretary of the Army, the Commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard and various environmental groups. We are in the process of retaining counsel to represent our interests at the time of the DEP public hearings if local approvals are granted.

We note from our recent review of documents in your offices that there have been frequent meetings between your staffs and the developers. We are concerned that none of your staff members have contacted any of our members and, more disappointing, any abutter.

Again, your task of reviewing seemingly ever-changing plans is a 'thankless' task for which all residents of Nantucket are extremely grateful.

Very truly yours,

Read K. McCaffrey