PLANNING BOARD
TOWN OF TISBURY
P.O. BOX 602
TOWN HALL ANNEX
VINEYARD HAVEN, MASSACHUSETTS 02568
(508) 696-4270
MEETING MINUTES
DATE: September 1, 2010
TIME: 7:00 PM
PLACE: Town Hall Annex, 66 High Point Lane
ATTENDANCE: Aldrin, Peak, Seidman and Thompson
BILLS: Petty Cash………………………….$6.15
MEETING MINUTES: As referred in the August 25, 2010 Meeting Agenda
4 August 2010 m/s/c 4/0/0 As amended
11 August 2010 m/s/c 4/0/0 As amended
25 August 2010 m/s/c 4/0/0 As amended
APPOINTMENTS:
7:00PM Douglas Hoehn, SB& H Inc Re: Juanita Laulee Bartlett, Trustee – Bartlett Island Trust, 241 Main Street
Mr. Hoehn submitted a division of land creating two lots for consideration as an ANR under the Subdivision Control Law for the purpose of separating the two pre-existing, non-conforming dwellings on the property onto their own separate lots.
Mr. Hoehn indicated that the division of land was designed to meet the dimensional requirements for the zoning district to make the lots as conforming as possible. Although not required by state statue for pre-existing, non-conforming structures, Mr. Hoehn designed a plan that created frontage for both lots along the existing 12 ft wide concrete drive. The driveway was described to run to the rear house and ending in a cul-de-sac.
Mr. Peak informed Mr. Hoehn that the driveway did not qualify as a private road, and could not be utilized for frontage. Mr. Hoehn reminded Mr. Peak that the two dwellings predated the Board’s regulations, and were allowed to be on separate lots without even meeting the frontage requirement. The Board did not dispute the age of the buildings. Mr. Peak however questioned the use of the carriage house for living purposes. Mr. Hoehn did not provide documentation confirming when the carriage house was use for human habitation.
Mr. Hoehn asked the Board if they would be able to make a determination this evening. Mr. Peak replied in the negative, stating that he needed time to review the regulations before he could make a determination. Mr. Peak informed the Board that the proposal resembled the ANR Mr. Ferraro submitted to the Planning Board a couple of years ago for property on West Chop. It’s created a situation he did not want to repeat. Mr. Peak advised Mr. Hoehn that if the proposal did not qualify as an ANR, it would have to be resubmitted as a Form C Subdivision of land.
Mr. Aldrin recommended continuing the discussions next week. And this was acceptable to Mr. Hoehn. Board members agreed to schedule Mr. Hoehn’s appointment on September 8, 2010 at 7PM.
7:30 PM Robert Wheeler and Clearance Barnes Re: High Point Lane
Mr. Wheeler informed the Board that he and Mr. Barnes had been meeting with the LUPC at the MV Commission relative to a proposal for a gas station. He mentioned that they were interested in operating a gas station on property owned by Mr. Barnes at the corner of State Road and High Point Lane.
Mr. Wheeler wanted to discuss the proposal with the Planning Board in hopes of soliciting their support and to address the MV Commission’s issues with traffic. He disseminated a one-page handout entitled High Point Way issues – Sept. 1, 2010 and read the document, herein attached.
Mr. Barnes commented that he was very interested in the Planning Board’s impressions about having a gas station on High Point Lane. He felt there were several advantages to having a service station away from Five Corners, and the traffic congestion. More importantly it was going to be a family owned and well operated enterprise. Although he was not going to be directly involved in the operations, he planned to oversee the business to make sure it was run properly.
It was his impression that there was demand for the service that was only going to increase. An extra facility provided healthy competition. He assured the Board that he did not plan to have a convenience store, although he did want to sell some hot dogs, and a few trinkets.
Mr. Peak noted that the Planning Board was not adamantly opposed to the concept of a gas station, and recalled that it had been discussed in conjunction with the connector road, and the Park-N-Ride. They felt the area was a apt location for this type of use, but he was concerned that the lot in question was very narrow, and as such could present a problem getting people in and out of the property without being on top of the intersection.
Mr. Wheeler provided a draft layout of the gas station on the property reflecting three fuel pumps. Mr. Peak inquired if there was any reason why the gas pumps could not be long enough to fuel cars no matter where the fuel cap was. Mr. Barnes planned on designing the pumps so that customers can access and exit the property at both egresses and fuel up at any direction.
Mr. Peak reiterated that the Planning Board considered a fuel service station an appropriate use within the area in light of their plans to construct a connector road, and the Park-N-Ride. The only other issue that could present a problem was the distance of the closest egress into the gas station. He thought it was important to keep the entrance into the gas station as far away as possible from the State Road intersection Mr. Barnes noted that it was 350 ft. up High Point Lane.
Mr. Seidman asked Mr. Barnes if he knew what the maximum number of service stations was for the entire island. Mr. Barnes replied that there were several private gas pumps on island that were no longer in business.
Mr. Seidman recommended writing Mr. Barnes a letter of support. Mr. Peak noted that Mr. Stephenson had some thoughts on the concept, which should be taken into consideration, before the Planning Board supported a particular project. He reminded the Board that Mr. Stephenson had also voiced some concerns about service stations at the intersection on State Road and High Point Lane that should be discussed. And the board members agreed. There being no further discussion, Mr. Wheeler and Mr. Barnes departed at 8:05 PM
8:10 PM Public Hearing (Cont): Island Deli Market, AP 09C11, 86 Beach Road
Attendance: None
The continuation of the hearing was duly opened at 8:10 PM. Mr. Peak, Planning Board Co-chairman read the notice into the minutes, and advised the Board that they were obligated to continue the hearing until the MV Commission made a determination on the proposal.
Board members were reminded that the proposal was referred to the MV Commission as a DRI, a regional review process which was still in progress. According to the MV Commission’s extended schedule, the applicant’s hearing was to take place on September 16, 2010. He therefore recommended continuing the public hearing until September 22, 2010 at 7:45PM. There being no discussion, Mr. Aldrin so moved. Mr. Seidman seconded the motion, which motion carried. 4/0/0
At the conclusion of the discussions, the Planning Board resumed their regularly scheduled meeting at 8:12 PM
8:14 PM Public Hearing (Cont): Tisbury Marina LLC, AP 09C08
Attendance: None
Mr. Peak opened the continuation of the public hearing for Mr. Rodrigues at 8:14PM, and read the applicant’s hearing notice into the record for the minutes. The Planning Board Co-chairman explained that they were once again required to continue the applicant’s hearing until the MV Commission rendered a determination on their referral as a DRI.
Board members were informed that the MV Commission was still scrutinizing the applicant’s proposal, so that they would have to continue the hearing until September 22, 2010. He suggested reopening the hearing at 8PM.
Mr. Aldrin therefore moved to continue the hearing until September 22, 2010 at 8PM in the Town Hall Annex. Mr. Seidman seconded the motion. And the motion carried. 4/0/0
The Planning Board resumed their regularly scheduled meeting at 8:16PM.
BOARD DISCUSSION:
1. Request for Legal Counsel
RE: Reid A. Dunn
Board members were advised that the Planning Board’s discussion with the Board of Selectmen on August 11, 2010 relative to the request for a legal opinion was not clear. The Board Secretary was uncertain if the vote included having town counsel review the Master Deed, in addition to Mr. Dunn’s attorney’s opinion.
Mr. Peak explained that he had originally wanted to ask Town Counsel if it was appropriate to accept the legal opinion the applicant secured from his attorney, at his expense. Mr. Seidman indicated that he had asked the Board of Selectmen for a separate opinion from Town Counsel.
Mr. Peak thought the situation would be simplified if they asked Town Counsel to confirm whether or not Mr. Dunn’s attorney’s legal opinion was correct. Mr. Seidman clarified that he wanted Town Counsel to read the updated Master Deed, and Mr. Dunn’s attorney’s opinion to advise them whether or not he concurred.
Mr. Peak therefore recommended sending Town Counsel a copy of the Condo Association’s most current Master Deed and a copy of Mr. Dunn’s attorney’s legal opinion to ask him if he reads the document the same way, and if the opinion is valid.
2. Tisbury Energy Committee
In discussions with Mr. Fried regarding renewable energy, Mr. Seidman inquired about the met tower, and learned that there was an issue with distance. Mr. Fried indicated that they could not meet the 900 ft distance requirement from the nearest residence.
Mr. Peak recalled that the issue had to do with wind speed. Mr. Seidman inquired if anyone had approached the nearest resident to ask the person if he/she mind having the met tower nearby. It seemed to minor an issue to stop a worthwhile project. Mr. Peak did not think that was the issue, but recommended holding the discussions when Mr. Stephenson was available to participate in the discussions, since he was involved in the project with UMass.
3. Planning Board’s September 2010 Meeting Schedule
RE: September 29, 2010
Mr. Seidman recommended canceling the Planning Board’s meeting on 29 September 2010. Mr. Thompson seconded the motion, which motion carried. 4/0/0
CORRESPONDENCE:
1. MV Commission
A. 27 August 2010 Extended Schedule
B. 2 September 2010 Meeting Agenda
2. Thomas W. French, Ph.D – Div. of Fisheries & Wildlife
RE: Vineyard Haven Dredging & Associated Dredged Materials
3. John Bugbee, Town Administrator
RE: Proposed Green Energy Program
4. West Thomson/Reuter
RE: Zoning Bulletin, 10 July 2010
PRO FORM Meeting opened, conducted and closed in due form at 9:20 P.M.
(m/s/c 4/0/0)
Respectfully submitted;
____________________________________________
Patricia V. Harris, Secretary
APPROVAL: Approved and accepted as official minutes;
______________ _________________________
Date L. Anthony Peak
Co-Chairman
| 
