Miacomet group will challenge board decision
DEVELOPMENTS
BY PETER B. BRACE INDEPENDENT WRITER
Members of the Miacomet Conservation Association are not settling for the 19-lot cluster subdivision on Ellen's Way that the Planning Board approved at its March 12 meeting.

This group of neighbors, abutters and concerned citizens is planning an appeal of the board's decision based on developer Bluefin, LLC's (Billy Cassidy and Daniel Lugosch) and the Planning Board's unwillingness to build and push for, respectively, a conventionally zoned subdivision of twoacre lots in the LUG-2 zone.

The neighbors do not believe that a cluster subdivision - clusters can pack more lots into a tighter area in exchange for a 75-percent open contribution - will work in this location because they believe Bluefin would be building on the open space that should be protected. They have repeatedly asked Bluefin to change the location of the cluster so it is sited not at the south end of the 28.8-acre property at the back of properties along Pond View Drive, but where the existing sand pit is that the developer plans to fill in and landscape.

"We don't feel that the commercial site was suited for a cluster development," said Allison Woram of 3 Pond View Drive. "A cluster development is supposed to preserve and protect open and natural land. I don't think a sand pit qualifies as natural and open land that the public wants protected."

The Miacomet Conservation Association has 20 days from March 15, the date when the Planning Board endorsed Bluefin's plan and filed it with the Town Clerk's office, to file its appeal of the board's decision in Nantucket Superior Court.

Bluefin in turn, has told the Planning Board and the abutters that it would not change its site plan and Bluefin attorney Bill Hunter maintains that the cluster is a better use of the land.

"We had said all along that there was a very large parcel of land to the north and we wanted [our] open land to be contiguous with that land, which is essentially Land Bank land. There will be walking trails, it will be accessible to the public; it just seems to be a more thoughtful use of the property than a conventional subdivision or cluster that divided it north to south."

This group of neighbors is also awaiting a ruling from the state's Department of Environmental Protection on their request for a superseding order of conditions to overturn the order of conditions issued by Nantucket's Conservation Commission on Jan. 3.

The Miacomet Conservation Association asserts that the ConCom dealt Bluefin an order of conditions prematurely because the developer did not submit stormwater management calculations meeting the Stormwater Management Policy in time for the ConCom's public hearing. They also allege that the ConCom did not consider evidence of missing information in the notice of intent and questions whether this information was ever received by the commission.

Additionally, the neighbors of this project charge Bluefin with not going the distance to protect Miacomet Pond from effluent leaking from the cluster's septic systems despite Health Inspector Richard Ray's testimony that groundwater in this area flows not to the pond, but toward the ocean.

"The project fails to protect the interest of the [Wetland Protection] Act and fails to meet the performance and design standards of the regulations by allowing an oversized development, resulting in avoidable alterations and impacts to the buffer zone," said the Miacomet Conservation Association's attorney Gregor I. McGregor of the Boston firm, McGregor & Associates. "The order causes manifest injustice to the petitioners and abutters."

Hunter is not surprised by either appeal and said that his clients plan to be use SeptiTech nitrogenreducing alternative design septic systems that remove more contaminants from sewage than conventional septic systems.

"We expected it," he said. "We expected that the Planning Board decision would be appealed; it is certainly their right."

Hunter said that his clients would not be breaking ground on Ellen's Way until all appeals are resolved, but that removal of sand from the sand pit on the property can continue as it is preexisting

use. I