Conservation commission debates clearer definition for coastal stabilization devices, adds debris removal to minor activities list

The Nantucket Conservation Commission met May 1 to discuss proposed updates to the Nantucket Wetland Protection Regulations, focusing on how the rules define coastal engineering structures, whether debris removal should be added to the commission’s minor-activity permit list, and how to handle pilot or test projects.

The discussion matters because the commission and staff want clearer rules for temporary stabilization measures—such as dune grids and coir products—so applicants and staff understand when a device is regulated as a structure and when it is treated as a temporary measure. The commission also considered adding a narrow debris-removal allowance to its minor-activity list to speed routine cleanups.

Staff member Will opened the discussion by proposing a tighter definition of “structure” that would exclude temporary, removable stabilization materials: "I can't see something temporary like that as structure," he said, describing dune guard grids and similar devices that are installed to build sand and then removed. Will said geotextile fabric is already specifically called a coastal engineering structure in the regulations and that the proposed change is intended to cover emerging technologies not specifically listed.

Commission members debated how to treat materials made from natural fibers (for example, coir) versus synthetic materials. Will noted that natural products “would not be considered a structure” under his suggested wording, while plastic sheeting anchored to a bank would be considered a coastal engineering structure. Commissioners discussed whether permanency or a time threshold should determine structure status; Will suggested a test such as “assembled at a fixed location for more than three years,” while others cautioned that a fixed time limit (for example, one year) could create perverse incentives or force reapplications.

The commission also discussed adding a specific line to the minor-activity permit category to allow short, light debris and trash removal (for example, hand removal of refuse) with staff inspection and approval. Will emphasized that anything requiring heavy machinery or excavation would not qualify and "these all have to be inspected and approved by Will." The commission agreed conceptually to include debris removal but noted specific definitions would be needed before any formal regulation change.

On test or pilot projects, commissioners said the town should allow temporary, experimental installations for new technologies that lack regional performance histories. Will and other commissioners suggested drafting a definition for “test project” (pilot installations intended to evaluate performance standards) but agreed that detail should be worked out by staff and town counsel rather than finalized at this meeting.

Commissioners reviewed the procedural steps to change regulations: the commission drafts language, town council must review, the commission must hold a public hearing, advertise changes for at least three weeks, and set an effective date at least three weeks after the hearing if no modifications are required. Will confirmed that policies and procedures (internal documents) do not require the same advertisement or town-council review as regulations.

Next steps included staff drafting proposed language for structure/coastal engineering definitions, clarifying the debris-removal language for minor activities, and coordinating with town counsel and the commission on scheduling a public hearing. Commissioners indicated they would use an October meeting if needed to complete the process.

The meeting did not include a formal vote on any regulatory amendments; commissioners treated the conversation as direction for staff and legal review.

Commissioners and staff said they would circulate proposed text and return to the commission for public meeting(s) and then a public hearing when the language is ready.