Skip Navigation
This table is used for column layout.
Planning Board Minutes 12/08/2010

P.O. BOX 602
(508) 696-4270
Fax (508) 696-7341


DATE:                   December 8, 2010        

TIME:                           7:10 PM

PLACE:                  Town Hall Annex, 66 High Point Lane

ATTENDANCE:             Aldrin, Peak and Thompson

BILLS:                  MV Times ………………………..$126.50
                                Petty Cash (Postage)………………$    6.32
MEETING MINUTES:        As referred in the  , 2010 Meeting Agenda
                                17 November 2010        Deferred
                                 01 December 2010       Deferred


7:11 PM Reid Silva Re: Form A – Ronald Pine, AP 23A29.1 and 23A29.3     

Mr. Reid submitted a proposal for a property line adjustment between two existing commercial lots to reflect the correct property boundaries.

Mr. Pine, the developer and current owner of the abutting property wanted to eliminate the confusion in the overlapping boundaries between Pine Village’s Condominium Trust and the abutting commercial lot.

Mr. Peak thought the division of land was straight forward, and entertained a motion to endorse the plan as an ANR under the Subdivision Control law.  Mr. Aldrin so moved. Mr. Thompson seconded the motion, which motion carried.  3/0/0

7:15 PM Public Hearing: Application for a Special Permit by AT&T on AP 10A01
                Attendance: None

At the applicant’s request, Mr. Peak, Planning Board Co- Chairman entertained a motion to continue the public hearing on December 15, 2010 at 7:15 PM given that they did not have a quorum to hold the discussions.

Mr. Aldrin so moved. Mr. Thompson seconded the motion, which motion carried. 3/0/0

The Planning Board resumed their regularly scheduled session at 7:24 PM.

7:20 PM          John Abrams, South Mountain Co for MV Museum
                David Nathan, MV Museum and Alan Bushey, South Mountain Co

Mr. Abrams informed the Board that they were interested in soliciting the Board’s impressions about relocating the MV Museum from its current site in Edgartown to the St Pierre property on Lagoon Pond Ave.

Mr. Nathan mentioned that the Edgartown location had a limited amount of space and storage so that a major part of their collection was not being shown or cared for properly. With the support of a private donor, they’ve looked at various sites in which to relocate the museum, including the St. Pierre property.

The members were so impressed with the property’s location and views, that they decided to move forward on a feasibility study to determine if property was suited for a museum. Mr. Abrams, the project manager was hired to do the feasibility study, which had to be completed by January 2011. Based on current calculations, Mr. Abrams reported that the museum would require a total of 32000 sq ft. of space, which would necessitate the addition of another 10,000 sq. ft. to the existing building.  

Board members were advised that the MV Museum group were interesting in:
a.      connecting the property visually and functionally to Vineyard Haven,
b.      minimizing parking and paving on site,
c.      making parking as visually obscure for both the museum and neighbors,
d.      designing a disposal works system using the existing system to keep the nitrates out of the pond,
e.      designing a native landscape that would require limited irrigation,
f.      managing storm water on site,
g.      maximizing the sensitivity of the neighboring properties with regards to noise and light, and
h.      show casing the original building and creating new structures that will complement the old building without diminishing its importance.

Board members were asked for their opinions at this juncture, specifically if there were any       potential problems or obstacles that had to be overcome. It was suggested that they were looking into the parking issues, the pedestrian and vehicular traffic to and from the property during events and potential issues with access to the property. They had discussed using other parking facilities or shared use facilities to keep traffic off Skiff Avenue.

Mr. Nathan believed the critical issue was whether or not the museum qualified as an educational use, because it would allow the use in a residential district.

Mr. Aldrin commented that the site was better suited for a museum than a town hall.

Mr. Peak preferred seeing the original structure and site maintained for its iconic significance. And where he thought the museum was a good use for the property, he clarified for the record that he did not speak for the Board, because they did not have opportunity to discuss the merits of the proposal.

Mr. Nathan inquired if they should consider a zoning bylaw amendment permitting a museum within a residential district, or generate a legal opinion about the museum’s qualifications as an educational facility for town counsel’s review and determination. He asked if it would expedite the review process, so that they can meet with the MV Commission on 13 January 2011 and the other town boards and residents for their impressions and/or reactions.  

Mr. Peak believed the abutters were already very sensitive to traffic because Skiff Avenue  was often used as an alternate route to avoid the Edgartown-Vineyard Haven Road intersection. He thought the biggest objection would more than likely be speed. He also inquired if they’ve considered an easement for a path suitable for bikes and pedestrians in the orthodontist’s property right behind the St Pierre property to enhance access to the museum.

Mr. Aldrin suggested opening the path to public. Mr. Peak added that they should consider opening the grounds to the public and to make it appear more of a park to welcome the general public. Mr. Nathan indicated that they were thinking of removing some of the trees to open up the property and restore greater views to the water. Mr. Peak thought the addition(s) could be constructed in such a way that they could serve as a buffer.

The discussions reverted to the topic of zoning, and the possibility of qualifying the museum as an educational use. Mr. Peak explained that he could not give them a definitive answer tonight, but that it was possible that the museum qualified as an educational use.

Mr. Abrams inquired how they could obtain a more definitive answer.

Mr. Peak suggested that the Planning Board could ask town counsel for case law that defined the parameters of this particular kind of use.  Mr. Nathan inquired if as an educational facility, they were allowed to use the yard for non-museum related events and benefits i.e. weddings. The park-like grounds was perfect for large formal functions and in time,  a cultural community center.

Mr. Abrams mentioned that they had to provide “function” space indoors to accommodate at least one hundred and fifty people for lectures, film series, etc. which only available at the      Tisbury school auditorium.

There being no further discussion the Board, Mr. Abrams and members of the MV Museum departed at 8:55 PM


1. Susan Fairbanks, Winyah Circle
RE:  Application of s. 07.03.02

Mr. Peak did not have the opportunity to contact town counsel or Mr. Barwick, and requested additional time to pursue a line of inquiry that might help them make a determination on the applicability of the above referenced section of the bylaw.  

2. Robert F. Jewett Et Al
RE: Form A Application, AP 04G07

Board members, Mr. Aldrin and Mr. Thompson did not have the opportunity to do a site visit. They were to be reminded for next week’s meeting, at which time the Board had to render a determination on the Form A application.

3. Community Preservation Community

Mr. Aldrin reporred that the Committee had been meeting the last three or four days to listen to the applicant’s presentations for funds, which was subsequently awarded as follows:

$90,000.00 to reduce rent subsidities
$20,000.00 for the Habitat for Humanity
$225,000.00 towards the construction of the Lake Street Condo apartments
$54,000.00 to clean up around Tashmoo Spring Building
$25,000.00 to the First Baptist Church to repair windows
$5,000.00 to the Stone Church for the repair of their windows
$50,000.00 towards the renovation of the Spring Building
$10,000.00  for the restoration of town records
$50,000.00 to the Vineyard Playhouse for exterior renovations, and
$30,000.00  to fix the perimeter wall of the cemetery on Main Street.

In an aside, Melinda Loberg noted that the Finance & Advisory Committee was discussing the possibility of discontinuing or reducing the funds collected for Community Preservation. It was her impression that the concept was gaining interest and support.


1. Tisbury Conservation Commission
A. Public Hearing Notice – Robert Franklin, AP 16N04 (construction of a fence, boat racks, ramp and removal of trees)
B. Public Hearing Notice – David Orfao, AP 36A2.1 & 36A03 (replacement of two dwellings, modification of an existing septic system, landscaping)

2. MV Commission
A. DRI Checklist (proposed revisions)

B. 03 December 2010 Extended Schedule

PRO FORM        Meeting opened, conducted and closed in due form at 9:00 P.M.
                        (m/s/c  /0/0)   
Respectfully submitted;
Patricia V. Harris, Secretary

APPROVAL:       Approved and accepted as official minutes;

______________  _________________________
Date            L. Anthony Peak