Planning Board Minutes
March 27, 2006
4:30p.m.
Town Hall
Present: William Meegan, Chair, John Flender, Russell Walton, Richard Osnoss, Janet Weidner, Mitchell Posin, Edward Kenyon, and Deborah Cini, Administrative Assistant.
Public: Rachel and James Hickey, David Flanders, Clifton Stone, Marcia Cini, Glen Provost, Fran Flanders, Jackie Mendez-Diaz, Jim Feiner, Julianne Flanders Thorpe, Bart Thorpe, Mary and Jonathan Boyd, and Frank Fenner.
Call to Order:
Mr. Meegan opened the Public Hearing @ 4:30p.m.
Mr. Meegan outline the agenda for the Public Hearing as follows:
Reading of the Public Hearing Notice
Review of the submitted Subdivision Plans
Determine if the Subdivision must be sent to the MVC
Applicants Presentation
Planning Board Questions
Other Town Boards
Testimony
-Written letters
-Oral testimony
Reading of the Public Hearing Notice:
Mr. Meegan reminded all present to sign the attendance sheet and to address all questions to the Board. Mr. Meegan proceeded to read the public notice.
Review of the Submitted Subdivision Plans:
The Planning Board then reviewed the Plans as presented. The Subdivision proposes 37± acres divided into 9 lots. Lot 5 and part of Lot 4 are cut out of a preexisting lot from the Peaked Hill Pastures subdivision, a former DRI. The Parcel also resides within the Roadside District and includes Streams and Wetlands Draining into (a) Coastal Great Pond. The proposed road will access all parcels except Lot 5 that will be accessed by Pasture Lane.
Mr. Walton addressed the areas that are shaded in red, explaining that there is a 200-foot setback from Fulling Mill Brook as it is a perennial stream and the building envelopes as drawn are located in the setback area. Mr. Provost stated that he does not believe they are restricted from building within the setback and will follow the process with the Conservation Commission.
MVC Determination:
Mr. Meegan stated the Planning Board needed to determine if this application warrants referral to the MVC. The Board determined this Subdivision Plan triggers sections 3.102a, 3.205 and 3.103 outlined in the MVC Standards and Criteria:
"3.102 Any development, with the concurrence of the Martha’s Vineyard Commission, which:
a) is on property which has been, in part or in whole, the subject of a previous DRI
application and which was denied, or is an amendment or modification to a
previously approved DRI Application; (“once a DRI always a DRI”);or…
3.103 Within any District of Critical Planning Concern, any development which the Martha’s Vineyard Commission has specifically classified as being of regional impact within the Guidelines approved for that DCPC.
3.205 Any development which proposes to divide a contiguous or related ownership of land of thirty (30) acres or more, except when divided into less than six (6) parcels that are irrevocably prohibited from further division."
Mr. Meegan called for a vote of the Board to determine if the Application is an automatic referral to the MVC as a DRI. All approved with Seven Ayes. The application will be referred to the MVC based on the three triggers. Mr. Meegan asked if there were any comments from the applicant or public. No comments.
Applicant Presentation:
Mr. Provost made his presentation as the agent for the Applicant. Mr. Provost would like to clarify the 40-foot Right of Way was created when the Modigliani lot was created and the same access point is proposed for use by the Subdivision. The Road will cross Fulling Mill Brook, which will result in a bridge having to be constructed.
Mr. Meegan questioned if this Subdivision Plan had been filed with the Conservation Commission. Mr. Provost stated that he filed with the BOH and the Planning Board as required with the Subdivision Control Law. Mr. Meegan reminded him of the Planning Boards Subdivision Rules and Regulations Section 2.18:
"At the time of filing of the Definitive Plan with the Planning Board, the applicant shall also file a copy with the Board of Health and the Conservation Commission. Those Boards shall report to the Planning Board in writing their approval or disapproval of said plan within 45 days. …"
Mr. Provost stated that he was unaware of the regulation and will submit the Plan to the Conservation Commission.
Mr. Kenyon asked if the applicant is willing to restrict any building within 50 (or an agreed- upon number) feet of the proposed road? This would prevent building right upon the road. Mr. Provost stated they would consider this. The Planning Board would like to schedule a site review soon to see the property, and asked whether the line of the road was passable
Other Town Boards:
Mr. Meegan opened the floor to other town Boards. Mr. Feiner was recognized as the chair of the Trails and Byways Committee. Mr. Feiner stated that he requests a trail easement connecting the Peaked Hill Pastures subdivision to Fulling Mill Brook. The Letter from the Land Bank stating the same was read into the minutes. Mr. Flender read the letter from the Chilmark Housing Committee requesting a Homesite Housing lot be saved from this Subdivision.
Letters from Abutters:
Mr. Meegan read the letter from the Modigliani brothers requesting the proposed road be moved to the West side of the Price parcel of land. Mr. Meegan read the letter from Ms. Lanning requesting the Fulling Mill Brook be protected as the waters are in "pristine condition".
Public Testimony:
Mr. Meegan opened the floor to oral testimony from the public:
Mr. Stone stated concerns with Fulling Mill Brook, the effect the subdivision will have on his and his sister’s property and the existing ROW on both their properties.
Mr. Stone stated concerns about sediment and fertilizer collecting in the stream and offered the idea of creating an entire parcel for the Fulling Mill Brook. This would allow the Land Bank to possibly purchase the property and keep the land clean. In regards to his property Mr. Stone requests lot 7 not have a swimming pool as several of his abutters have them and it would impact his property. He finally requests a berm be placed to restrict access over his property or have High Meadow renounce access to the small ROW as a condition of approval, and better topographical maps of the property.
Mr. Provost stated the land is steep and the topographical lines did not come out well on the copies of the plan submitted (only the 10’ contours show, dimly).
He will generate another topographic map. Mr. Meegan read section 2.15 of the Subdivision Rules and Regulations:
"2.15 Environmental Plan Contents
A set of plans at uniform scale shall be submitted, encompassing the entire subdivision on a single sheet not larger than 42" x 60", showing the following:
a. The same data as on the definitive plan, reproduced as a clear acetate or Mylar overlay.
b. Topography at two-foot contour intervals, with graphic drainage analysis; indication of annual high water mark, flood plains, 100-year flood level, if known; location of existing structures, including fences and wall.
c. Present and proposed vegetative cover analysis, including identification of general cover type (wooded, thicket, grassland, fresh wetland, etc.), location and identification of all major tree groupings plus other outstanding trees or other botanical features, important wildlife habitats, and identification of areas not to be disturbed by construction.
d. Soil types, groundwater level, location and results of soil percolation or other subsurface tests.
e. Visual analysis, including analysis of scenic vistas, and locations of visual prominence."
Ms. Marcia Cini was recognized to speak. Ms. Cini stated that she is a former MVC Commissioner and would like to emphasize the importance of this referral to the Commission. The trail and watershed are regional issues and the preserving of the vista and encouraging affordable housing are very important.
Mr. Meegan offered to Mr. Provost and the applicants an opportunity to address any of the issues that were brought up. Mr. Provost questioned whom Ms. Cini represented. Ms. Cini stated she represented Khedouri and Segal. Mr. Provost made no further statement.
The Planning Board requested a map showing all abutting properties in contiguous ownership. Mr. Provost stated he could present a tax map composite showing the contiguous ownership parcels. The Board also requested an overlay to show the 200-foot set back from the riverfront. Mr. Provost stated concerns as that might imply the second hundred feet are a no build zone and he believes it is buildable. Mr. Flender stated the Board needs an opinion from the Conservation Commission as to whether the 200-foot set back applies.
Mr. Meegan stated the Public Hearing would remain open as to allow correspondence to be received. Once the Plan comes back from the Commission another date will be published as notification. The Public Hearing was “Continued” at 6:00p.m.
Planning Board Business:
The Minutes of March 13, 2006 were approved as written.
There are no comments on the ZBA decisions.
In response to Mr. Bussink's inquiry the Board reviewed the previously approved Form C application of Sturgis and Pearlson. After discussion the Board agreed they would look favorably on the same plan if the only change were redesignation of the Youth Lot to a Homesite Housing Lot. If there were any other changes Mr. Bussink would have to come before the Board with a new Form C application.
Meeting adjourned at 6:45p.m.
These minutes respectfully submitted by Deborah Cini, Administrative Assistant.
| 
