PLANNING BOARD
TOWN OF TISBURY
P.O. BOX 602
TOWN HALL ANNEX
VINEYARD HAVEN, MASSACHUSETTS 02568
(508) 696-4270
Fax (508) 696-7341
MEETING MINUTES
DATE: October 8, 2014
TIME: 7:00 PM
PLACE: Town Hall Annex
ATTENDANCE: Reece, Robinson, Peak and Thompson
BILLS: UPS Store……..……………………$ 25.00
UPS Store…………………………..$ 47.25
Tisbury Printers……………………..$392.00
Verizon………………………………$ 58.80
MV Times…………………………...$382.50
Postmaster…………………………..$ 62.00
P. Harris (Mileage)………………….$ 13.44
Advanced Imaging Technologies……$ 436.86
MINUTES: As referred in the September 24, 2014 Meeting Agenda
03 September 2014 Deferred
17 September 2014 m/s/c 3/0/0
APPOINTMENTS:
7:00 PM Reid Silva re: John & Viet Bachelor, AP 07C07 - Form A application
R. Silva submitted a Form A division of land creating a non-buildable parcel (Parcel A) of approximately 656 sq. ft. to convey to the abutter on AP 07C7.1 (J. Dupon).
Board members were informed that J. Dupon was in the process of selling his property (Le Grenier). The sale of the property was subject to the attainment of a written agreement for the continued use of the 656 sq. ft. area of land.
R. Silva explained that the Bachelors have allowed J. Dupon to use the area designated as Parcel A for his septic system and deliveries. Since the property was connected to the central sewer system, the space was essentially being used for deliveries.
Board members were advised that the two lots were in the B1 District, in which the dimensional requirements were listed at zero for frontage, depth and land area. The Bachelor’s lot was approximately 3800 sq. ft. (approximately 40’X100’) including the 656 sq. ft. that was being conveyed to J. Dupon.
A question arose with regard to the access easement on the Bachelors’ property. R. Silva explained that the Bachelors’ had created a perpetual easement for J. Dupon’s use, given that the trucks needed the extra space to back over into Parcel A. The easement simply gave the property owners on AP 07C07.1 the right of access. The Bachelor’s had no intention of selling the easement because they needed access to the parking area in the adjacent property.
There being no further discussion, D. Seidman entertained a motion. J. Thompson moved to endorse the Plan of Land as an ANR under the subdivision control law. B. Robinson seconded the motion, which motion carried. 3/0/0
7:17 PM Deliberations: Dunn Family LLC, AP 09B19.18+, Beach Road
D. Seidman opened the deliberations to review the applicant’s draft decision. Board members were emailed a copy to prepare for the discussions. D. Seidman inquired if the Board had any questions or comments with the contents of the draft document.
J. Thompson did not recall seeing language pertaining to the removal of the sign and girdle that was damaging the back of the black locust tree. D. Seidman noted that it was addressed in the State Road Real Estate’s draft decision. D. Reece informed the Board that Mary & Jackson Kenworth met with the Tisbury Marketplace Condominium Trustees regarding the exterior renovations, which included the removal of the sign. They were closing on the sale of the restaurant on November 4, 2014.
There being no further comment, D. Seidman referred the Board to the draft, and explained that he wanted the background information to reflect the Board’s initial action, and timeline of events to illustrate the primary issues. The Findings reflected the discussions of the hearing, and the Decision, in which the increase in seating capacity was granted. D. Seidman noted that the document included C. Doble’s comments regarding her concerns with the traffic and parking at the marketplace. D. Reece was aware of the issues, and asked the Kenworth’s to consider contacting the property owners to the east about leasing parking spaces for the three months during the summer.
D, Seidman inquired if the board members had an issue or comment with the conditions and restrictions. None responded. D. Seidman recommended revising the language in the fifth restriction to state “…downward” facing …” D. Seidman noted that he included a finding to explain why they could not grant R. Dunn a waiver from the filing fee. He reminded them that R. Dunn had requested a waiver, but was informed that they did not have precedence for granting such relief.
D. Seidman moved to approve the draft decision as amended with conditions and restrictions as listed. B. Robinson seconded the motion, and the motion carried 3/0/0
7:25 PM Deliberations: State Road Real Estate LLC AP 09B19.18+, Beach Road
D. Seidman opened the deliberations to review the applicant’s draft decision. Board members were emailed a copy to prepare for the discussions. D. Seidman inquired if the Board had any questions or comments with the contents of the draft document.
D. Seidman referred the Board to the draft, and explained that the background section of the decision provided information about the previous owners’ operations, and permits. In the section entitled Findings, the Planning Board granted the applicant flexibility in the restaurant’s hours of operations, and included information about the removal of the sign from the tree. D. Reece indicated that the applicants were relocating one of the signs on the gable end facing the Net Result and at the gabled front of the building facing the Shell Station. He also noted that the restaurant was going to be renamed “Beach Road”.
The board secretary noted that the applicants were obligated to review all exterior renovations and the sign with the Site Plan Review Board. It was listed as a restriction. It was suggested that it would be wise to invite a member of the Marketplace’s Board of Trustees to the discussions.
D. Reece thought the language in the Condition No. 7 recommended using “… will be downward facing …” instead of “should be”. D. Seidman increased. Board members did not express an issue with the remaining conditions and restrictions.
D. Seidman asked D. Reece if there was an application process in place that the applicants would have employ for outside events such as weddings, etc. D. Reece replied in the affirmative, explaining that the application included a fee and limited to the condo unit owners.
There being no further discussion, D. Seidman moved to approved the draft decision as amended with the conditions and restrictions listed in the document. B. Robinson seconded the motion, which motion carried. 3/0/0
BOARD DISCUSSIONS:
1. Vision Planning Workshop on 30 September 2014, 03 October 2014 and 04 October 2014
RE: Update
C. Doble emailed D. Seidman to state that they had obtained rich commentary from all three sessions, and considering two workshops for the month of November, in which she planned to present an analysis of the data they collected from the work sessions on 9/30, 10/3 and 10/4.
The board secretary advised the Board that C. Doble was considering different venues for the two workshops, one of which was the American Legion Hall. D. Seidman thought they would consider the school gym. It was suggested that the Senior Center would be much more appropriate for the evening session because it provided the tables and ample parking. B. Robinson indicated that the Legion Hall offered similar accommodations that may work best for the morning session. He was planning a site visit to confirm its potential.
J. Thompson inquired about the library and fire station. D. Seidman noted that people were not able to move freely in the library. B. Robinson thought the fire station was too small for their needs. D. Seidman inquired about the Katherine Cornell Theater. B. Robinson noted that they were restrictions about food, poor parking accommodations, and did not have the tables they needed. There were just too many issues.
D. Reece inquired about the vendors’ response for food donations. D. Seidman thought they did well. They had cookies, donuts, apple cider, coffee, etc.
The board secretary noted that the Senior Center was normally available after 4PM , and free on Wednesday night, being November 5. The American Legion Hall was available on the mornings of November 5 – November 7, 2014. C. Doble in a phone conversation expressed an interest to hold the sessions back to back, so that if they held the first session on November 5th, she would like to hold the second session the following morning on November 6.
It was suggested that they should hold the evening session on November 5th and the second session the following morning on the 6th at the American Legion Hall.
D. Seidman informed the Board that he submitted a letter to both local papers thanking the participants for attending the workshops, the vendors for providing beverages and desserts, Cheryl Doble and Ben Robinson for their hard work, and the town departments for the use of their facilities.
2. Jay Grande, Town Administrator
RE: Road Safety Audit for the Five Corners intersection and the Look Street intersection for October 23rd from 9AM until noon
D. Seidman inquired if they had an agenda to let them know what they were proposing to do. The board secretary noted that they were not given any information about the audit from town hall. The email was sent to them in case they were interested in attending.
3. Island Wide Planning Board Meeting
D. Seidman wanted to ask the Planning Board members in each town if they would consider attending each other’s meeting at least once a quarter. B. Robinson recalled that they had discussed this in the past. D. Seidman concurred, noting that the MV Commission offered to coordinate the effort, but that it did not receive support. He thought they should initiate it, and hold the first session in Vineyard Haven.
Board members agreed, but recommended waiting until next year, after they’ve concluded the workshops, analyzed the data and generated a report. D. Reece inquired if they would need larger accommodations. Board members did not think it would be necessary if they sent representatives. B. Robinson thought they should develop an agenda. D. Seidman noted that at their last invitation, members from the Town of Oak Bluffs were the only ones to attend.
D. Reece thought it may require personal phone calls to every member. D. Seidman thought about calling the chairmen. B. Robinson recommended adding the topic on their agenda in December 2014.
CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED:
1. Paul Wohler, Tisbury Water Works (TWW)
RE: Invitation to a meeting (11/5 or 12/2) at 4 PM to discuss their new building
B. Robinson inquired about the invitation. ME Larsen noted that the TWW had acquired one million dollars for this project at town meeting. D. Seidman inquired about the location of the new construction. Board members indicated that it was across the street, up the hill outside of the discharge area. B. Robinson noted that the participants at the visioning workshops were expressing an interest in having a park in the same area.
D. Seidman inquired if they considered relocating on High Point Lane and be part of a municipal campus. B. Robinson did not understand why they would want to use prime property to park heavy equipment when there were far better municipal uses for the property.
Board members were interested in securing additional information about their proposal, and recommended contacting P. Wohler to accept his invitation for November 5, 2014.
2. John Custer, School Principal
RE: Tisbury School Committee meeting on October 14, 2014 at 8:30 A
D. Seidman noticed that they’ve not included the “new school” on their agendas, so that it was not clear if they were considering other options. The grant they applied for was for a new building at a new location.
Board members thought it important for the school committee to look at other alternatives. D Seidman recommended inviting them to meet with the Planning Board for an update.
3. Timothy McLean, Treasurer/Collector
RE: Annual Audit
4. Alan Burnett
RE: Petition regarding the administration of the downtown area
Board members inquired for additional information about A. Burnett and the petition. The board secretary noted that the Arts and Cultural District board members, the Board of Selectmen and Town Clerk were not aware of the petition.
ME Larsen understood the first issue listed in the petition pertained to the Night Herring Gallery’s complaint with the antique car show. The antique car show, now in its third year was a fund raiser for the Fire Department. She explained that the proprietors claimed that it drove customers away, because they were focused on the antique cars.
Board members questioned the validity of the petition and A. Burnett’s statements. ME Larsen agreed with the second comment regarding the need for a policeman on Main Street. D. Seidman noted that A. Burnett’s comment referred to the policemen’s comportment.
5. MV Commission
A. 03 October 2014 Extended Schedule
B. DRI Decision #647- IHT, 6 Water Street
C. Paul Foley re Saltwater Restaurant
6. Thomson Reuters
RE: Zoning Bulletin, 25 September 2014
PRO FORM Meeting opened, conducted and closed in due form at 8:25 P.M. (m/s/c 3/0/0)
Respectfully submitted;
____________________________________________
Patricia V. Harris, Secretary
APPROVAL: Approved and accepted as official minutes;
______________ _________________________
Date Daniel Seidman
Chairman
| 