Skip Navigation
This table is used for column layout.
Planning Board Minutes 01/16/2013

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


DATE:           January 16, 2013
TIME:                   6:45 PM

PLACE:          Town Hall Annex

ATTENDANCE:     Peak, Seidman, Stephenson and Thompson
BILLS:          Postmaster……………………………….$148.00
                        MV Times……………………………….$  28.50

MINUTES:                As referred in the January 02, 2013 Meeting Agenda

                        02 January 2013 MSC     4/0/0


6:45 PM Informal Discussions with Geoghan Coogan and Stop&Shop’s                                Representatives, Water Street, Vineyard Haven
                Attendance: Kenneth A. Barwick, Building Insp.; Melinda Loberg, FinCom;                 Mark London, MVC Dir.

Board members were informed that Stop & Shop’s proprietors were interested in expanding the supermarket on Water Street, and considering the construction of a 2 ¼ story building (23,800 sq. ft). Stop & Shop’s representatives indicated that they were going to have to raise the building to meet the building code, and use the ground level as a parking garage.

They were thinking of relocating the main access into the supermarket on Norton Lane with a ‘right out only exit’ onto Water Street. To accommodate the new access, they planned on relocating the receiving dock behind Midnight Farm. The new design would allow them to have two means of egress into the building. They also wanted to maintain the existing entrance at the corner via an elevator (or elevator w/ an escalator) to the mezzanine floor and add a second means of access on Norton Lane.

Board members were advised that Stop & Shop had hired Charles Sullivan as their architect, and Geoghan Coogan as their attorney to assist with the permitting process.  As they continue to refine their plans, they’ve met with various town boards, Island Housing Trust and the Martha’s Vineyard Commission to solicit their input. They anticipated submiting more definitive plans in the immediate future. At present they were working on the elevations, storm water remediation, and a traffic analysis to submit with their architectural plans.

The informal drawings that were presented to the Board were for discussion purposes only and basically an illustration of the concept. The drawing reviewed by the Board was identified as Drawing #SD1 entitled Proposed Stop-N-Shop Store #0423 – Proposed Parking Lot Layout by Vanasse, Hangen & Brussin, Inc. dated January 2, 2013 with a scale of 1”=2’ (Project No. 72451.00).

Mr. Peak recently learned that the Island Housing Trust’s building on Water Street was a 200 years old structure of historical significance. Mr. London indicated that it was the last remaining Greek Revival building outside the William Street Historic District. Mr. Peak thought it was a great time to coordinate the two projects to complement each other. He suggested that they should consult Mr. Harold Chapdelaine, Chairman of the William Street Historical Commission for recommendations.

Mr. Stephenson inquired about the elevation of the finished floor. He was informed that the elevation at the intersection at Cromwell & Norton Lane was 17.5 ft., and that the finished floor at Midnight Farm was 18.5 ft.  Mr. Stephenson indicated that he wanted to bring a few topics to their attention. First, that there was a possibility that the traffic flow on Union Street would be re-directed. Secondly, the town was exploring the possibility of converting Cromwell Lane into a shared use path, so that the Cromwell Lane/Norton Lane intersection was very important to them. Thirdly, the Planning Board had been discussing the frontage along Water Street, and its importance to the town. They thought it would help the town if they had a wider landscaped sidewalk because of the foot traffic.

Mr. Peak indicated that the Planning Board had talked about it with Mr. Jordi. They’ve suggested that IHT could orientate the building so that it was closer to the street to make it more uniform with the street line. He thought Stop & Shop could coordinate their project with IHT to improve the streetscape to make it attractive for pedestrians.

Mr. Stephenson inquired if the entrance on Water Street could be large enough to create a public space. He produced a couple of sketches for tonight’s discussions to illustrate some of the ideas he wanted to present. Mr. Stephenson recommended relocating the receiving dock to the left side of building and maintaining the two means of egress in the parking lot. He also thought that the entry at the lower level should be all glass, and used for additional retail space or maintained as a public space. He thought it was important that the sidewalk should be wide enough to be landscaped.

There were questions about Island Housing Trust’s reaction to having an unloading dock next door. It was suggested that they could offer to share the driveway.  There were also questions whether a truck could back up on Water Street to get to the receiving dock.

Mr. Peak expressed some concern with the façade of the building. The existing building was quite massive. If they were to build to the maximum allowable dimensional requirements of the district, they’d have to design the building so that it minimized its visual impact. Mr. London recommended building the structure in sections and at different heights going up the hill to break it up. Stop & Shop’s representatives were aware of the issue, and noted that they were working to address it in their design.

7:15 PM Public Hearing: Proposed ZBL Amendment of Sec. 04.02.14 (Re-scheduled)
        Attendance: Melinda Loberg, FinCom Representative

Mr. Peak informed the Board that they could not hold the hearing, because the Administrative Secretary discovered an oversight in the mailings required by state statute. The hearing as a result was re-scheduled on February 6, 2013.

7:56 PM Deliberations: Special Permit Application by Cingular Wireless, PCS, LLC                dba AT&T, High Point Lane, AP 22A11

The continuation of the deliberations for Cingular Wireless was duly opened at 7:56 PM. Mr. Peak, Planning Board Co-Chairman reminded the Board that they had voted to grant the applicant a special permit to upgrade the existing wireless communications facility on the water tank, and to continue the deliberations tonight to review the draft decision for corrections.

Mr. Peak referred the Board to the second page of the document and read through each section with the following recommended revisions:

a.      The requirements listed in Section 07.16.04(13) – Testing, and Section 07.16.04(14) – Noise Standards should be listed as a condition.
b.      The requirements listed in Application Submittal Requirement No. 8 (an acoustic engineer’s certified statement) for Wireless Communication Facilities was also to be listed as a condition

It was noted for the record that the applicant in 2001 submitted an acoustic engineers’ report with their original application, and did not provide the board with an updated report. The noise impact study was generated by Bob Alach - Alactronics Inc.

Mr. Seidman recommended asking the applicant to comply with the requirement. Board members agreed.  Mr. Peak recommended adding the following condition:

6.  In the original permit application of 2001, Alactronics Inc. certified that the existing and maximum future measurements of noise from the proposed Wireless Communication Facility would be 50 decibels or less. The applicant shall recertify that this remains true in accordance with Section 07.16.04(14) of the Tisbury Zoning Bylaw, and Application Submittal Requirement No. 8 for Wireless Communication Facilities.

There being no further comment, Mr. Peak entertained a motion to approve the special permit document as amended. Mr. Stephenson so moved. Mr. Thompson seconded the motion, which motion carried.  4/0/0

Mr. Stephenson entered a motion to close the deliberations. Mr. Thompson seconded the motion, which motion also carried. 4/0/0   The deliberations were duly closed at 8:15 PM.


1. Marijuana Dispensaries
RE: Regulations

Mr. Seidman did not think they had to re-invent the wheel. Since every town had to draft a regulation for the use, he thought they should coordinate their efforts and invite the Planning Boards on the island to a meeting so that they could discuss it.  Mr. Stephenson concurred, and noted that the state allowed one dispensary per county.

Mr. Stephenson thought there should be a standard or model ordinance available. Mr. Seidman thought they could look to the State of California.  Mr. Thompson noted that while the state may make it legal, it remains illegal at the federal level, which has created an issue for several people, who are now facing long term jail sentences for opening such dispensaries.  Mr. Peak understood, noting that state law did not supersede federal law.

Mr. Thompson favored treating the use as a business and allowing it in their business districts. Mr. Seidman appeared to agree, with one exception. There should be a regulation restricting the use a certain distance (e.g. 200 ft) from a school.

Mr. Stephenson thought they needed to how the use was being defined; how the product was being defined and classified. He preferred a model ordinance. Mrs. Loberg mentioned that the Massachusetts Municipal Association will be meeting next week to discuss this very topic.  She recalled that the state required one such dispensary in every county.

Mrs. Loberg added that the Dukes County Health Council Task Force asked the state and municipalities to delay the regulation’s enforcement to give them additional time to learn about the requirements.      

Mr. Peak noted that he asked to have the subject placed on the agenda because of inquiries from the Gazette. Although he’s not personally given the topic any thought, he felt they should contact the other Planning Boards on the island to inquire if they were contemplating any regulations, and willing to coordinate their efforts so that they were consistent across the island.    Board members agreed.

2. Sandra Kingston
RE: ZBL Amendment to designate the Tashmoo Overlook property as open space in perpetuity

Board members were advised that Ms. Kingston was of the opinion that she had to pursue a zoning regulation to ensure permanent open space protection of the property. She was concerned that the property in question did not have conservation restriction, even though it was implied. Her concern stemmed from a conversation she had with Mr. Packer, who informed Ms. Kingston that in the 1970s the Board of Selectmen tried to place housing on the 28+ acres parcel.

In order to prevent this from occurring, she contacted Mr. Krystal about her concern, and he in turn referred her to the Planning Board with the suggestion that it may require a zoning bylaw amendment.

The Board Secretary in response to Ms. Kingston’s questions, she contacted the Water Department to inquire about the possibility and learn that the property in question was protected under Chapter 98/Article 97, which would require both a town vote and an ‘act from congress’ to change the use of the property. Ms, Dimond, the Water Department’s Administrative Secretary added that any change of use would require the Water Commissioner’s endorsement first. She questioned whether they would support such proposal.

Ms. Kingston asked the Adm. Secretary to contact Brendan O’Neill, the Executive Director at the Vineyard Conservation Society for additional information about the conservation restriction.

Mr. O’Neill explained that there appeared to be some confusion on Ms. Kingston’s part, in that he has explained to her that it was not a zoning issue. He agreed with the Planning Board’s Administrative Secretary that Ms. Kingston should place herself on the Water Department’s Agenda to explain her proposal, and meet with the Board of Selectmen with the Water Department’s support to request town counsel’s assistance in the initiative. Town Counsel would then be able to advise the Board of Selectmen if a confirmatory deed or a deed-transfer-and-conveyance-back approach was the best approach to assert the protection of the Public Trust Doctrine (MA Constitution Article 97).

Mr. O’Neill cc a copy of the email he sent Ms. Kingston reaffirming the specifics of his conversation with the Administrative Secretary and the steps Ms. Kingston should take.

3. Mr. Stephenson and Mr. Seidman indicated that Cheryl Dobel had expressed an interest in working with the Planning Board or as a liaison to the MV Commission on projects.  

Mr. Peak inquired if she had considered serving as an Associate Board Member to give herself the opportunity to sit on the board to see if she would consider running for a position on the Board. The Board advised Mr. Stephenson and Mr. Seidman to ask Ms. Dobel to submit a letter of interest, so that they could recommend her to the Board of Selectmen

Mr. Stephenson announced that he was not prepared to retire from the Planning Board and has reconsidered. He noted that he would be running for re-election.


1.  Marion Mudge, Town Clerk
A. Nomination Papers
B. Cabinet’s Meeting on 01/10/13 to amend/revoke the Community Preservation Act
C. Warrant Articles

b. Mr. Peak explained that they wanted to ask  town voters if they wanted to remain in the program.

c. Board members reviewed and discussed the warrant articles. Mr. Peak was particularly interested in the Dept. of Public Work’s article requesting $20,000.00 to improve the High Point Lane’s sports field, and another $15,000.00 for a pocket park. The article implied that the DPW had the authority to designate the use of the old fire station property. Board of Selectmen in addition was requesting $80,000.00 to improve the same lot. Mr. Stephenson questioned if the funds covered the landscaping.  It irked him that town always fell short in funding the landscaping, when it was a very important component.

Mr. Peak noted that in a conversation with Mr. Israel, he implied that Mr. LaPiana had negotiated an easement on town property with the Hotel’s representatives that would allow them to access their parking spaces. It concerned him enough to contact Mrs. Jones to inquire if town counsel had replied to the letter from the hotel’s attorney, in which they were asserting their rights to access the parking spaces over town property. Mrs. Jones at the time was not aware that the Planning Board had received such a letter, and learned that town counsel never received a copy to address it.  Mrs. Jones was sent a copy of the letter, which she promised to send to town counsel.

Mr. Stephenson mentioned that he had met with Mr. LaPiana and the hotel’s representatives to discuss the very issue. They believed they had been granted right of passage across town property to gain access to the five parking spaces. In the course of the discussions, Mr. LaPiana offered them five parking spaces on town property with the understanding that they would have to landscape the area accommodating the five parking spaces in the front of their property. The recommendation was well received by everyone at the meeting.

Mr. Stephenson noted that they also learned that the hotel had a large vacant area in the back of building at the lower level, which they’d like to convert into retail space with direct access to Veteran’s Park, where they could serve fast food (hot dogs, hamburgers)  He thought the retail use nicely complemented the park.

2. Colleen McAndrews, Tisbury School Committee
RE: School Committee Meeting on February 12, 2013 @ 5PM (Tentative) to discuss the School Facility’s Needs

Mr. Stephenson inquired if they had a copy of the consultant’s reports. Mr. Peak indicated that they were online. He recommended contacting John Custard for the link.

3. Douglas Reese, Chairman – Tisbury Marketplace Board of Trustees
RE: Dunn Reid’s plan to offer for sale one of the offices on the 2nd floor

4. Fred LaPiana, DPW Dir.
RE:  cc:  Board of Health – relocation of the composting pile

5. Carlos TB Fragata, Environmental Analyst -DEP Waterways Reg. Program
RE: SSA’s application to dredge an existing mooring field to previous design depths at 47 Water Street

6. Tisbury Zoning Board of Appeals
A. Hearing Notice – Clarence Barnes, AP 22A12 (commercial activity outside enclosed building)
B. Hearing Notice – Clarence Barnes, AP 22A26, (commercial activity outside enclosed building)
C. Variance Case #2135 – James E. McMann, AP 22C7.1 (variance from setback requirement for accessory structure)
D. Permit #2134 – Delano Realty Trust, AP 09A05 (commercial building w/ two dwelling units)

7. Massachusetts Municipal Association
RE: TheBeacon, January 2013

PRO FORM        Meeting opened, conducted and closed in due form at 9:00 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