Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Master Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Consultants tell Nantucket Planning Board that climate, water and permitting are key obstacles to master-plan goals
Summary
Consultants presented draft master-plan goals and a list of “key issues” — from sea-level rise to loss of year-round housing and a cumbersome permitting system — and urged the board to prioritize implementation capacity. Board members asked for more public engagement and a clearer timeline.
Barrett Planning Group consultants presented the Planning Board with a condensed set of master-plan goals and a set of “key issues” they say must be addressed to achieve the goals, focusing on climate resilience, drinking-water vulnerability and the town’s permitting and enforcement capacity.
Judy, the lead consultant, told the board that Nantucket’s coastal resilience plan lays out needed projects but that “the cost of implementing the necessary projects to protect the town is enormous and ... increasing as the years go by.” She warned that capital planning and grant-seeking will be critical to any effective response.
The consultants also flagged a municipal drinking-water vulnerability: “all of the public drinking water system draws from a sole source aquifer,” they said, noting contaminants have been detected on the island and underscoring the risks of relying on a single supply. The presentation linked those physical risks to planning, conservation and future land-use choices the town will need to make.
On land use and community systems, preservation planner Jen Dherty summarized workforce- and market-pressure problems: loss of year-round housing, overcrowding, and the island’s small commercial footprint (she noted roughly 1 percent of land currently supports goods and services). The team said historic-preservation rules and design guidelines also may need modernization to better integrate climate resilience and housing objectives.
Several board members welcomed the overview but asked for a more deliberate public-engagement plan. Board member Hillary said she was not ready to accept the materials at tonight’s meeting and asked for an additional public workshop and clearer dates for community review of the draft goals. Planning board member Dave Iverson said the consultants’ priority — translating plans into an implementable “scoreboard” — was exactly the right emphasis: “We’re really good at creating plans ... but we need to understand how those plans are enacted.”
Consultants said they will hold a second round of staff workshops and aim to post condensed existing-conditions material and an initial implementation framework in mid‑May. The Planning Board did not take any final action on the key issues but asked staff to circulate the materials and return to the board for additional review and community outreach.
Why it matters: The master plan sets the long-range framework for growth, conservation and public facilities. Consultants told the board the work now must move from diagnosis to delivery — identifying which capital projects, staffing (for permitting and enforcement) and regulatory changes are required to make the plan more than a “paper” document.
Next steps: consultants will refine the draft implementation program, hold additional staff workshops and post highlights for public review; the board asked staff to arrange follow-up sessions (including joint meetings with other town bodies) to align the master plan with the town’s strategic plan and capital priorities.
