 |
APPROVED
Chilmark Planning Board
October 26, 2015
Present: Chair, Rich Osnoss , Mitchell Posin, Joan Malkin , John Eisner, Janet Weidner, Sam Hart
Not Present: Dan Greenbaum
Public: Pam Goff, Adam Turner, MVC Exec. Dir., Catherine Thompson, Jeremy, Alex Elvin, Jane Slater, David Damroth
Staff: Jennifer Christy, Administrative Assistant, Marina Lent, BOH admin.
Meeting called to order at 4:35 PM
- Adam Turner, Martha’s Vineyard Commission:
- Mr. Turner introduced himself and gave a brief description of his history and his reason for visiting the Board.
- Every two years, the MVC must publicly review the DRI Checklist.
- Mr. Turner stated the MVC has so far not taken any action in a revision of the DRI Checklist. He is interested in visiting all the island towns to gather all the comments that Boards may have regarding the checklist.
- Mr. Turner assured the Board that their comments are welcome and needed.
- Mr. Osnoss stated the Board has not had a great amount of time to review the DRI Checklist, Version 12.
- Mr. Turner emphasized that the island Planning Boards are a valuable resource and an essential link to the MVC.
- Mr. Turner noted he had attended the hearing in Boston on s. 122 and he commented that people spoke on both sides of the issue. (Bill S. 122, An Act promoting the planning and development of sustainable communities, https://malegislature.gov/Bills/189/Senate/S122 )
- Mr. Osnoss thanked Mr. Turner for his efforts to reach out to the Town.
- Mr. Eisner echoed that sentiment and noted that the MVC should work with the island Towns to to develop a stronger alliance.
- Mr. Turner asked if the Board would provide a timeline for when he should return to hear questions and comments regarding the DRI Checklist. Mr. Osnoss noted that a good meeting to come back to may be the second one in November.
- Historical House DRAFT zoning bylaw amendment public hearing:
- Mr. Osnoss opened the hearing at 4:50PM, read the advertisement, and asked Ms. Weidner to give an overview of the proposed bylaw origin and development. Ms. Weidner proceeded to give a brief description of the origin of the idea and the subsequent draft idea that the Board has now developed.
- Ms. Malkin noted that there would be no additional cost to anyone through the implementation of the proposed bylaw. And, she noted that the Board wanted to support the retention of an element of the Town that contributes to the character of the Town: historic houses.
- Discussion occurred regarding the number of Historic Houses in Town, built prior to 1866. As of 1985, the Master Plan lists approximately 80 Historical Houses and the Assessor’s database lists approximately 61 prior to 1866.
- The Board discussed wording that would allow houses that are built prior to 1866, but that do not appear in the Master Plan, to be “covered” by the proposed bylaw.
- Ms. Thompson noted that there are other historic houses that are from other eras in Town. She feels that the proposed bylaw may inadvertently project a judgement about what is historically significant.
- Ms. Malkin stated that it may be useful to consider the preservation of “historically significant” houses.
- Ms. Weidner felt that Ms. Goff may have proposed the limit of Civil War era houses and prior to protect houses that are likely more challenging to maintain.
- Mr. Damroth stated that “architecturally significant” houses should be saved rather than just a certain class of historic houses. He stated there should be thought given to how much flexibility the proposed bylaw may give to owners to preserve more historic resources in Town.
- Ms. Slater stated that there should be care taken to avoid excessive limitations to homeowners in Town who need to be able to sell their house in the future. She stated she is in favor of saving old houses, but not in favor of causing hardship to homeowners as a byproduct of the proposed bylaw.
- Mr. Osnoss stated he is not yet ready to redefine the date within the proposed bylaw that defines Historic Houses, but he stated he is interested in cataloging the interesting and unusual architecture of the Town.
- Mr. Eisner stated he thought older houses may be in more need of preservation than houses built in the 1950s and later.
- Ms. Thompson noted the 1.5 acre zoning in Menemsha and feels that this proposed bylaw may create a problem with density in this area. Mr. Eisner supported the discussion of this point.
- Ms. Malkin stated she would like to see the density data. Ms. Weidner stated she agreed and would find the data to see exactly how many Historic Houses are in Town and exactly where they are, built prior to 1866. Ms. Thompson stated she thought that there was approximately 20 in the Menemsha area.
- Mr. Osnoss stated he very much missed Mr. Greenbaum’s input on issues and wished him well (Mr. Greenbaum resigned from the Board last week.)
- Ms. Weidner made a motion to continue the public hearing to December 14, 2015. Ms. Malkin seconded the motion. All ayes to continue the hearing to December 14, 2015.
- Ms. Malkin summarized the three main issues raised at the public hearing: the question of particular houses the historical commission may designate as pre-Civil War that are not on the list in the Master Plan, the question of houses that may have special architectural significance and whether they should be included in the definition of Historic House, and whether the proposed bylaw may create unwanted density, particularly in areas of Town with smaller lots such as Menemsha.
- Form A & Form C Review Documents:
- Ms. Malkin requested that the document add a question:
- Is this plan part of a DRI, mandatory or discretionary
- More discussion occurred regarding the limitations of an ANR decision. Ms. Malkin volunteered to go through the documents and see if there is anything that should be added to the Form A checklist for Board members.
- Mr. Osnoss requested that Ms. Christy please provide the document at Planning Board meetings from now on.
- Executive Office for Administration and Finance Municipal Listening Sessions:
- Ms. Lent gave a brief summary of the listening session opportunities.
- Ms. Lent will send a link to the listening sessions.
- Mr. Osnoss asked if there would be a way to follow the progress and results of the listening sessions. Ms. Lent stated her hope that there would be.
- Mr. Eisner noted the article in the Gazette regarding septic on the island. Brief discussion occurred.
- All Island Planning Board Meeting (AIPB):
- Brief discussion occurred regarding the agenda for the AIPB meeting.
- Mr. Hart inquired what position the Board may take concerning s.122.
- Ms. Malkin noted that, conceptually, it seems to be an improvement overall.
- Ms. Malkin suggested that it is possible that an outcome of the AIPB meeting may be a subcommittee (one member from each island town Board) to meet to develop conclusions about s.122 in order for the island towns to attempt to have one position on s.122.
- Ms. Christy noted the letter to Mr. Meinelt was sent certified mail.
- September 28, 2015 minutes were not reviewed.
- October 13, 2015 minutes were not reviewed.
- Wednesday, November 4, 2015 AIPB Meeting
- Monday, November 9, 2015 (STM)-NO PLANNING BOARD MEETING (Subcommittee Meeting at 9AM)
- Monday, November 23, 2015 (Jennifer is out)
Meeting adjourned at 6:10 PM. Minutes respectfully submitted by Jennifer L. Christ
| |
