Reject Surfside Crossing For The Community's Wellbeing

To the editor: Windmills, STRs, DPW locations, affordable housing and units won’t matter if the water is contaminated. Why is this not a priority?

Since 2018, Nantucket Tipping Point has highlighted concerns for our community’s health, safety, welfare, the environment and our finite resources. Our sole source aquifer is one of the primary reasons that our community is able to exist on island. It should be a priority to all to protect it.

Dr. John Coon, PhD, JD presented to the ZBA (Zoning Board of Appeals) at the request of Nantucket Tipping Point in 2018 & 2019 regarding his grave concerns about our sole source aquifer, our quality of water, PFAS contamination and the harmful effects of over development on our island’s finite resources. Some brushed off his comments and concerns as matters that did not concern the ZBA and that this was the wrong board to be presenting this information to. Dr. Coon’s humble reply then was “you can listen to me now, or call me in ten years once you realize you have a huge problem."

Since that initial meeting where Dr. Coon presented information to the ZBA and he was told it was the wrong board to present to, I along with others have gone to many boards on this island with concerns regarding PFAS contamination - the Airport Commission, the Select Board, the Board of Health, the Conservation Commission, the Finance Committee, the Planning Board, NP&EDC, the School Committee and even Town Meeting to name a few.

It hasn’t been quite ten years since Dr. Coon presented to the ZBA, but we have a problem. PFAS is here and it’s not going away. High density over developments are only exacerbating and intensifying the problem.

On August 29, 2024, the Capital Program Committee (CPC) held its meeting. I would like to highlight a few things that really came to my attention because frankly they directly affect me, my family, our health and the community I live in. I live mid-island near a private drinking well that was flagged as having unsafe drinking water due to PFAS contamination. PFAS numbers high enough out of the “safe” range that the Wannacomet Water Director went before the CPC requesting funds to provide municipal water be installed ahead of other projects that had been discussed in previous year’s budget discussion.

For point of reference, the State of Massachusetts has set a Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) of 20 parts per trillion (ppt) for the combined concentration of six PFAS chemicals (PFOS, PFOA, PFHxS, PFNA, PFHpA, and PFDA), collectively referred to as the PFAS6 in drinking water.

Massachusetts conducts a comprehensive review of its PFAS regulations every three years to ensure they align with the latest science. At the federal level, the EPA’s proposed MCL sets enforceable limits of 4 ppt each for PFOA and PFOS, with a Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG) of zero, reflecting the consensus that no level of exposure to toxic and bioaccumulative chemicals is safe.

While thousands of PFAS chemicals exist, only a subset is currently regulated, so we can expect both state and federal efforts to evolve as more research becomes available. Most chemicals are measured in parts per billion, but PFAS are so harmful that even the smallest concentrations—measured in parts per trillion—pose significant risks. I think we can all agree that no level of PFAS is safe to have in your drinking water. The wells referenced in the CPC meeting are of concern and substantially higher than the State MCL.

The CPC discussion is about a half hour long but the “CliffsNotes” version that I am trying to impress upon all of you is we have huge problem. High density developments are and will continue to make the situation worse.

Contamination of drinking water and a decrease in available water pressure are two of my many concerns, and the Wannacomet Water Director mentions both of those publicly at this meeting. What do we do if we can’t drink the water? If we can’t bathe in the water? If there is not enough water pressure to put out a fire? Or multiple fires? The island’s first responders and many community members risked their lives and with ingenuity and dedication to put out the Veranda House fire without fully depleting the available water. Surfside Crossing is proposing to build 19 Veranda House size buildings in one dense location. It won’t matter how many affordable units are built, where the trash bins are placed or what type of curbing is used on the roads if we don’t consider the risks to our health and safety. Coming before the Zoning Board of Appeals and asking for waivers and exceptions to rules, bylaws and regulations designed for our community’s protection and safety should not be considered. Economic profit should not take precedent over the risks created by this project. Nor should “minimum standards” be an option where there is no mutual aid readily available.

Not resolving the risk that is in place for the sake of economics and profit in the name of “affordable” housing is what Surfside Crossing is all about. I cannot stress to the ZBA enough to deny this project for the health, safety and welfare of our entire community. Our community’s future and the future of generations to come rests in your hands. What do you want your legacy to be? What side of history do you want to be on? Please deny this project.

Sincerely,

Meghan Perry