Tree committee opposes waiver for 43 Union Street; votes to send letter to ZBA

The Tree Committee of Nantucket voted unanimously to send a letter to the Zoning Board of Appeals opposing the granting of a waiver for construction at 43/43A Union Street, saying construction activity at the subdivided property would risk irreparable damage to a large street tree that neighbors and committee members described as historic and critical for erosion and flood control.

Committee members said the primary concern is root damage and soil compaction from excavation, material storage and vehicle access in a very confined yard space adjacent to the tree. The committee discussed site plans submitted to the ZBA that show a driveway on 43A (not included in the Historic District Commission permit documents) and warned that placing dumpsters, roll-off trucks or construction equipment near the trunk and drip line would likely harm the root system.

Mary Longacre, Tree Committee member, presented proposed protective language she read at a previous ZBA/HDC meeting and asked the committee to use it as a template. Longacre urged a condition stating that “construction activity shall not cause damage to the historic town tree(s) at 43 Union Street (43/43A). To ensure this, no soil disturbance, no storage of material, or passage of construction equipment shall be permitted on the site so that root damage or soil compaction does not occur. No removal of any limbs from the tree is permitted by anyone other than the town arborist or its designee. It should be verified by the town arborist that there has been no damage to the town tree before a certificate of occupancy may be issued.”

Committee members reviewed a consultant arborist’s letter (submitted with the application) that the applicant had retained. That arborist recommended no foot traffic over the roots, no storage of materials or mechanical traffic on the root zone and that work be supervised. The committee agreed those recommendations should be incorporated into the record and included as conditions or mitigation if the ZBA approves any relief.

Members discussed technical protections the committee will ask for if the ZBA permits work: a scaled overlay on the site plan showing the tree canopy/drip line (used as a conservative proxy for minimum root extent), a protective perimeter fence around the root zone during construction, limits on where dumpsters and material storage may be placed, supervision by the town arborist during any work within the root zone, and financial assurance (bond or escrow) to cover tree-monitoring or remediation because root damage may not appear immediately.

The committee also noted procedural issues: the Historic District Commission (HDC) materials did not show a driveway, while the plot plan submitted to the ZBA did; members said the discrepancy should be resolved and that zoning reviewers should inspect the site before approving changes that could affect roots. Several residents, including Diane Cummings and Mary Ellen Peters, spoke about mobility and neighborhood disruption and urged protection of the tree.

After discussion the committee made and seconded a motion to send a letter to the Zoning Board of Appeals opposing the waiver request on the grounds that construction activity “would irreparably damage” the tree(s) at 43/43A Union Street. The motion passed unanimously. Committee members said they will submit the letter with supporting documentation (photographs and a scaled overlay) before the ZBA hearing, scheduled for March 13, and will arrange for one or two committee representatives to attend the ZBA meeting to present the committee’s concerns.

The committee clarified that its preferred outcome is that the waiver not be granted; if the ZBA approves any relief, the committee will press for the arborist’s recommendations and the additional conditions described above to be imposed as part of any approval.