 |
APPROVED
Chilmark Planning Board
November 24, 2014
Present: Dan Greenbaum, Janet Weidner, Joan Malkin, John Flender, Mitch Posin, Rich Osnoss, Chair
Not Present: Andrew Fischer,
Public: Elise & Robert Elliston, Dan Seidman, Tisbury Planning Board
Staff: Jennifer Christy, Administrative Assistant
Meeting called to order at 4:31 PM.
- Dan Seidman, Tisbury Planning Board:
- Mr. Seidman suggested an All-Island Planning Board meeting 4 times a year.
- Mr. Seidman suggested the need to move towards an all-island effort in many areas of the island services. He noted fire, police, and highway services as possible candidates for eventual stream-lining in order to create a more efficient process and cost-savings for the island as a whole.
- Mr. Seidman suggested January 2015 as a possible time to begin meeting. The Board agreed that it would be a helpful opportunity and that they would be interested in attending joint meeting.
- Mr. Seidman noted water-quality is an island-wide issue and that this is the type of issue that needs to be dealt with as a broad, connected effort. He further noted that water, fire and safety are three areas that an all-island effort could hugely benefit. He noted that the discussion of this issue can be very sensitive due to the fact that the streamlining of island services and resources may mean the initial reduction of employment in certain towns.
- Robert Elliston: Map 14, Lot 29-1 Ashkenazi/ JMV Realty Trust
- Mr. Elliston was present and discussed the 100’ no cut zone noted on the plan, dated July 6, 1992.
- Mr. Elliston asked if the no cut zone could be eliminated on the northern boundary and if the owner could alter the building envelope site.
- Rich stated that the Planning Board needs to know whether the covenant, dated May 15, 1992, may be amended for the purposes of the no-cut zone on the northern boundary.
- Janet noted that the covenant, dated May 15, 1992, says it will “run with the land.” She noted that it does not seem there would be an allowance to amend the covenant.
- It was suggested that counsel would need to be asked if the covenant could be amended. Joan suggested counsel also be asked if a covenant may be amended and, if it is possible, who is required to be notified of a covenant amendment and whom it is prudent to notify.
- Further discussion occurred about the intention of the Planning Board at the time of the writing of the covenant and the possible feelings of the abutters at the current time.
- The Elliston’s drew attention to the letter from the Trustees of Reservations, in 1991, which details the importance of preserving the vegetation and special landscape of the area. The Elliston’s stated the owner’s intention is to restore this area to a heath land, which, because of the lack of care inherent to a no-cut zone, is now no longer preserved.
- The Board members agreed to consult counsel and visit the site, if counsel states there is an allowance to amend the covenant.
- Janet noted that the owners would need, if the covenant may be amended, to submit a Form C definitive plan since the plan notes the covenant on it.
- Mitchell asked to hear again what it is that the Board intends to ask counsel. Joan stated: “Does the Planning Board have the authority to amend a covenant that ‘runs with the land’? “
- Janet suggested counsel be asked if the owners would need to submit a Form C application if the covenant may be amended.
- Rich asked Jennifer to contact counsel and ask the questions. The Elliston’s were asked to await a call from Jennifer in order to attend a future Board meeting to hear any next steps that are possible.
- Town Committee on Squibnocket Discussion re lots at Map 35, Lot 17-4 & 17-2:
- Discussion occurred to ascertain exactly the task that the Squibnocket Committee has set the Planning Board. It was agreed that the Committee was not asking for a deliberation of the value of the various ideas to solve the current problem, but are rather asking the Planning Board to ascertain what could be done with the two lots at 17-4 and 17-2 (“Big & Little Weldon”).
- Further discussion occurred about the value of the Squibnocket ideas. Joan stated the value of the various ideas/solutions for solving the Squibnocket is to be dealt with by the Committee rather than at the Planning Board. The list submitted by Joan, on November 18, 2014, for how the lots could be used/capitalized was reviewed.
- Joan stated she could not be sure whether the bylaws are clear about whether parking for a large number of cars is allowed on a lot.
- Joan also asked if “Big & Little Weldon” (Lots 17-2 & 17-4) may be combined. She stated that a combination of the lots may allow for more parking opportunities. It was asked whether public ways may go through a lot without splitting it into two lots. It was suggested that the town road to Squibnocket might terminate before the “Little Weldon” lot thereby eliminating the possible problem of a town road traversing the two “Weldon” lots (which may be combined into one lot.)
- It was reiterated that two questions the Board has, within a response to the Town Committee on Squibnocket, are:
- What are the rules in town, if there are any, for parking in town? It was noted that the bylaws state that parking may occur as an incidental use to a permitted or accessory use. What if any restrictions apply to the use of land as a parking lot?
- May a public way split a lot while the lot remains one lot?
- Joan agreed to revise her list of answers to the possible uses of the two Weldon lots (provided in an email on November 18, 2014) and provide it to the Town Committee on Squibnocket.
- Minutes from the Nov. 10, 2014 meeting were not reviewed.
- December 8, 2014, Public Hearing & Meeting with the Housing Committee
- Topics to be discussed with the Housing Committee were discussed:
- Healthy Aging Initiative
- Affordable Housing opportunities
Meeting adjourned at 6:25PM. Minutes respectfully submitted by Jennifer L. Christy
| |
