Nantucket ZBA hears fire, traffic and water-quality concerns on Surfside Crossing modification; hearing continued

The Town of Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals on Jan. 15 heard extended remarks from town department heads and outside consultants on the Surfside Crossing modification, with fire, police, transportation, sewer and water officials raising concerns about emergency access, traffic mitigation funding and whether the project’s stormwater plan will prevent groundwater degradation. The board continued the hearing to Jan. 24, 2025, and recorded that the Housing Appeals Committee had granted the applicant an extension to Feb. 21, 2025.

The discussion matters because the Surfside Crossing site lies in a Zone 2 recharge area for the island’s drinking water supply and the modification increases concentrated impervious surface and residential units on the parcel — factors town officials said could raise the pollutant load to local groundwater. Multiple department heads said the project also strains traffic and emergency-access assumptions the town used in prior reviews.

Fire Chief Mike Cranston told the board the department’s principal concern is access: fire apparatus must be able to reach all buildings and the site plan should meet 527 CMR 1, the Massachusetts comprehensive fire code. “The roads need to be at least 20 feet wide…and that’s unobstructed,” Cranston said, adding the department prefers more than a single primary entrance and that any secondary access be remote from the primary entrance to preserve alternative routing in an emergency. Cranston said the site’s proposed reinforced-turf emergency access “meets the requirements of the fire code,” but he warned maintenance of that material can be problematic.

Chief of Police Jody Casper said the police department likewise “would have preferred to have one [access] come in a different way from a different end,” citing scenarios in which a crash or spill at the primary entrance could block access. Casper also warned the board to expect parking pressure and additional traffic at the existing three-way intersection of South Shore Road, Surfside Road and Fairgrounds Road.

Town transportation staff and consultants reviewed traffic projections and mitigation. Mike Burns (transportation) said he compared the project’s older traffic projections to actual counts collected in summer 2024 and recommended the board retain previously agreed proportional mitigation rates but update construction cost estimates to reflect inflation. Using the previously negotiated contribution rates (8.6% for the South Shore/Surfside/Fairgrounds roundabout and 4.4% for the Surfside/Mycomet/Surfside Drive improvements), Burns computed approximate developer contributions of about $593,400 and $303,600 respectively under present-day cost estimates (a 2018 cost estimate of $2.4 million recalculated to roughly $6.9 million for each of the two intersections). Burns recommended the board include any adjusted contribution percentage as a condition if it approves the modification.

Public-works and site-design comments focused on pedestrian circulation, ADA access and internal sidewalks. Drew Patnode (DPW) flagged multiple issues: multiple short sidewalks (many four-foot widths where a five-foot standard may apply), missing curb ramps and limited internal pedestrian connections from condominium buildings to central shared amenities. Don Bracken, the project engineer, said sidewalks and crosswalks connect to the association areas and that the final construction drawings can show ADA ramps and signage.

Sewer and water officials described system capacity and operational safeguards. Sewer Department representative David Gray said a gravity sewer main was installed along South Shore Road with stubs intended for the property; the line is installed but inactive until an upstream pump station and related work are completed. Gray said stormwater systems remain under subdivision/HOA control and stressed the town will require a detailed operations-and-maintenance plan for stormwater structures.

Mark Ouellette of Wannacomit Water said the utility can meet the project’s drinking-water and firefighting demand once an offline well is returned to service and a planned new source comes online. “Demand isn’t the real issue. It’s protecting what we have,” Ouellette said, describing concerns about impervious coverage, long-term maintenance and the need to show designs will recharge and protect groundwater.

Public-health director Rocky Miramontes and others recommended an independent peer review focused on stormwater effects to nearby private wells and the aquifer. Miramontes said local bylaws bar new private wells within 100 feet of stormwater infiltration structures and that the Board of Health had recommended an independent evaluation.

Representatives of the Nantucket Land and Water Council (NLWC) presented two outside experts by video. Water-resources consultant Scott Horsley told the board that conventional underground infiltration systems proposed for this site do not meet the bylaw’s performance standard that a project “not result in degradation of groundwater quality.” Horsley said the site’s scale — roughly 6.5 acres of new or concentrated impervious cover and more than 1,000 projected daily vehicle trips in some counts — increases pollutant load and that conventional measures in the MassDEP stormwater handbook would not adequately prevent groundwater degradation at that scale. “I don’t think this project meets the performance standard of no degradation,” Horsley said.

NLWC hydrology expert Sean Reardon said the stormwater design lacks vegetated, organic-media treatment that the stormwater standards identify for sensitive recharge areas; he argued the proposed underground infiltration approach omits the surface vegetation and organic filter media used to retain or break down many contaminants and PFAS precursors. “There is no organic media. There is no vegetation that is capable of taking these pollutants out,” Reardon said.

The developer’s attorney and engineer defended the design and its regulatory compliance. Attorney Paul Haverty and engineer Don Bracken said the stormwater approach follows the applicable standards cited in the town’s bylaw and the MassDEP handbook and said similar systems have been permitted elsewhere on Nantucket. The developer declined to fund an independent peer review requested by department staff and NLWC representatives, saying stormwater was not listed in the Housing Appeals Committee remand scope and that the modified plan’s impervious area is similar to prior submittals. The applicant provided written responses dated Jan. 8 and indicated consultants (including a code compliance expert) had commented previously to other town bodies.

The board recorded two formal votes. Early in the meeting the board approved the meeting agenda by roll-call vote (motion by John Brescher; second by Alisa Allen; vote: Brescher aye; Allen aye; Lisa Botticelli aye; Chair Susan McCarthy aye). At the close the board voted to continue the hearing to Jan. 24, 2025 (motion by John Brescher; second by Alisa Allen; roll-call vote recorded as John Brescher aye; Alisa Allen aye; Jim Modena aye; Lisa Botticelli aye; Chair Susan McCarthy aye). Members also voted to adjourn for the day by roll call.

What’s next: the ZBA scheduled a continuation for Jan. 24, 2025 (1 p.m.). Town staff said members of the water, sewer and DPW teams will meet to review the competing expert reports and the applicant’s O&M plan; officials advised the board they will return with focused, written comments. The Housing Appeals Committee’s order granting the applicant an extension to Feb. 21, 2025 was also made part of the record during the meeting.

Votes at a glance: Jan. 15, 2025 — Agenda approval: approved (motion: John Brescher; second: Alisa Allen; roll call: Brescher aye; Allen aye; Lisa Botticelli aye; Susan McCarthy aye). Hearing continued to Jan. 24, 2025: approved (motion: John Brescher; second: Alisa Allen; roll call: Brescher aye; Allen aye; Jim Modena aye; Lisa Botticelli aye; Susan McCarthy aye). Adjourn: approved (roll call recorded).