 |
APPROVED
Chilmark Planning Board
June 8, 2015
Present: Dan Greenbaum, Rich Osnoss, Chair, Janet Weidner, Joan Malkin, Sam Hart, John Eisner
Not Present: Mitchell Posin
Public: Reid Silva, VLSE, Robert & Elise Elliston, Andy & Onnie Palmer, Julie Schmidt
Staff: Jennifer Christy, Administrative Assistant, Lenny Jason, Building Inspector
Meeting called to order at 4:30 PM
- Form C: Sica, Map 14, Lot 29.1 & 29.2, Site Visit & Continued Public Hearing:
- Mr. Osnoss, opened the continued public hearing at 4:30PM. The Board departed for the site at 4:40PM.
- The Board visited the site at Map 14, Lot 29.1 & 29.2 and returned at 5:40PM.
- The Board reviewed the minutes from the Board meetings in 1991-1992, concerning the Dubin-Dranetz-Ashkenazi Subdivision (now Sica) lot. Ms. Elliston noted errors in the November 1991 minutes concerning the Menemsha Hills right-of-way (it is not located there) and the width of the right-of-way (she states it is 40’ right-of-way rather than 20’ right-of-way.)
- The Board inquired about the contours and topography of the lot and inquired whether the existing well would be used.
- The Board inquired whether the Hubschman’s and the Trustees had been contacted by Sica and whether they had views about the elimination of covenants. The Ellistons stated that the parties had not shared their thoughts with them, although they had walked with the Trustees on the land.
- Mr. Osnoss asked if the Board members had more to discuss before closing the hearing. Ms. Weidner stated her indecision at this point. Mr. Elliston encouraged the Board, if there are still questions, to contact the abutters. Ms. Malkin thanked the Ellistons for their willingness to agree to delay in order to learn as much as possible about what happened in the past. Ms. Malkin suggested the Board send a second letter to abutters to ask for further input. Mr. Silva made note of the purpose of the no cut zones and other covenants and described his feeling that the restrictions are outsized. Mr. Osnoss noted that it appears that the covenants were a result of the particular case that existed in 1992. Mr. Eisner and Ms. Malkin stated their view that, even though the Board may not impose these restrictions now, the act
of removing covenants is a different action and one that requires a greater amount of consideration and thought. Mr. Silva stated his view that the extra notification does not appear to protect the public in any additional way.
- Mr. Elliston stated his view that the Board should consider exploring the views of the abutters and he would support that rather than risking a negative decision.
- Ms. Malkin made a motion, with the support of the applicant’s representatives, to continue the hearing for the purpose of the Board to send a letter to the abutters requesting their comment and to include a plan with the letter with the specific note that the Form C currently before the Board does not include covenants as the original subdivision did include. The motion to send a letter was seconded and voted in the affirmative. A motion was made to continue the hearing to 4:30PM on July 13, 2015. The motion was seconded. The Board voted to continue the public hearing to July 13th.
- Homesite Discussion: Eddys & Julie Schmidt:
- Ms. Palmer reviewed the plan of their land and stated they are interested in cutting off a portion of their land to create a homesite housing lot for Ms. Schmidt.
- The Palmers are proposing a lot that does not have 100’ length of frontage on a way, but rather a 40’ length of frontage. Ms. Weidner stated there was a homesite that was done for Silliman Wass, on South Road, that she remembered had less than the required frontage.
- It was noted that the well that would service the homesite lot would be elsewhere on the Palmers’ lot and would therefore require an easement.
- The Palmers noted two existing ways and suggested a variance to all 40 ft. of frontage.
- Mr. Palmer noted there are minimal plans to develop the area and, therefore, possibly the 100 ft. frontage would be less necessary.
- Ms. Malkin suggested the homesite use the same driveway as the Palmers.
- Discussion occurred regarding the 100 ft. frontage requirement. Mr. Jason suggested the Palmers grant an easement in on their road to the homesite lot.
- Mr. Eisner noted the Board may need to address the future development of the Palmer’s lot.
- It was noted by Mr. Jason that the Palmers could build the road, from the Palmers’ lot and along 100 ft. of the homesite lot, then come to the Planning Board with a Form A (showing the frontage and access). Mr. Jason suggested the Palmers develop the frontage and then come back to the Board.
- Zoning Bylaws, Building Inspector:
- Mr. Jason responded to the questions from the Board regarding home occupations. He stated the special permit for home occupations applies to those home occupations that “conduct commerce” and engage in “retail” business. Mr. Jason stated the deciding factor is whether to require a special permit for a home occupation is whether the occupation has customers visiting the location for the purpose of purchasing and obtaining goods/services.
- Biennial Review Final Draft Report was reviewed.
- Discussion occurred regarding the issue of criteria for energy use in the Residential Building Size bylaw. Mr. Osnoss suggested the Board attend a Board of Health meeting to discuss ideas for more particular criteria for energy/waste conservation.
- No appointments were made.
- No minutes were reviewed.
- June 22, 2015
- All Island Planning Board Meeting: Sept. , 2015
Meeting adjourned at 7:30 PM. Minutes respectfully submitted by Jennifer L. Christy
| |
