Nantucket — The Nantucket Conservation Commission used its Oct. 23 public hearing to begin a semiannual check-in on the 2025 town wetlands protection regulations and related policies. Commissioners focused on several procedural changes and regulatory topics they plan to develop further: a standardized intake cover sheet for permit applications, a procedure to issue non‑waiver orders in bulk, definitions and a potential waiver pathway for test/pilot projects, a proposed limit on temporary structures, and ways to strengthen fertilizer controls in the commission’s jurisdiction.

Procedural changes and immediate steps: Commissioners agreed to pilot a policy change at the next meeting that would allow staff to present drafted orders of conditions for projects that do not require waivers and to issue those orders in bulk unless a commissioner opens a single item for discussion. Will (conservation staff) and the chair will circulate draft orders to commissioners in advance (the commission suggested 1–2 days before the meeting) so members can flag items they want to open at the meeting.

Cover sheet: Staff proposed and commissioners supported a standardized cover sheet for NOIs that would list key intake items — property owner and project rep contact info, submission date, map/parcel, short description, resource areas present, whether an NHESP review is required, and other clearance checks — to speed intake and reduce clerical back-and-forth.

Test/pilot projects and coastal-engineering definitions: Commissioners asked staff to draft definitions and a short procedural path for “test and pilot” projects — limited-duration trials of new materials or techniques intended to prove a research hypothesis about coastal stabilization or habitat outcomes. Will recommended combining a formal definition with a narrow waiver or limit on duration (for example, one-year approvals with monitoring and reporting). Commissioners also assigned homework to compile lists of examples and non-examples of “coastal engineering structures” so staff can prepare clearer regulatory language and example lists for future drafts.

Temporary structures: Commissioners discussed a recurring enforcement question about seasonal tents, pergolas and similar structures that can be assembled with component parts and used for months, circumventing permanent-structure limits. The commission directed staff to draft a definition of “temporary structure” and suggested 30 consecutive days as a threshold at which an installed structure should trigger permitting rather than be treated as exempt seasonal use. Staff will return a draft definition and proposed handling (staff review vs. full NOI) for future discussion.

Enforcement officer and continued enforcement focus: Commissioners discussed designating a commissioner to assist with enforcement follow-up and site visits. John Schaefer volunteered to serve as a liaison, and commissioners asked staff to request a legal opinion from town counsel and MACC (Massachusetts Association of Conservation Commissions) guidance to confirm the scope and allowable duties of an appointed commissioner enforcement officer while respecting open-meeting and enforcement protocols.

Fertilizer and turf controls: The commission reviewed a submission from the Nantucket Land and Water Council proposing stricter controls on fertilizer in jurisdictional areas. Commissioners agreed they already routinely condition permits to prohibit turf fertilizer and landscaping chemicals in buffer areas and that a near-term administrative step would be to add a consistent set of general conditions (applied to all orders) banning residential turf fertilizer use in jurisdictional areas unless expressly permitted for restoration or agriculture. Staff will draft proposed general conditions to apply to future orders and will continue discussion about whether an explicit regulatory change is warranted after outreach to landscapers and stakeholders.

Next steps and public input: Commissioners asked staff to circulate draft language on the cover sheet, temporary-structure definitions, and a proposed test/pilot-project pathway for review before the next meeting. The commission did not adopt regulatory text at the Oct. 23 hearing; rather, it set directions and asked staff to return with draft language and legal guidance. The commission invited public comment and will schedule follow-up work and potential regulatory amendments with appropriate advertising and comment periods when draft regulatory language is ready.

Why it matters: Changes to intake procedures and the adoption of clear definitions — for temporary structures, coastal-engineering structures and pilot projects — will affect how applicants prepare permit materials and how the commission enforces jurisdictional limits. The fertilizer discussion could result in consistent general permit conditions that reduce nutrient loading in sensitive wetland buffers.

Speakers quoted or referenced in this article are those who participated in the regulatory discussion and public-hearing segment on Oct. 23.