Skip Navigation
This table is used for column layout.
Chilmark Town Seal

Link to Departments
Link to Board of Selectmen
Link to Town Committees
Link to Summer Information
Link to Permits and Forms
Link to Dump
Link to Documents & Bylaws
Link to How To
Link to Useful Sites
Link to Chilmark Photos
Link to Email Subscriber
Link to Vendor Opportunities
Link to Job Opportunities
Link to Commonwealth Connect
Code Red Emergency Notification System

Code Red Emergency Notification System

Public Records Requests Guidelines

Public Records Requests

Pay Bills Online

Website Disclaimer
Welcome to the Town of Chilmark, MA
Conservation Commission Minutes 11/16/16

Present for the Conservation Commission and attending the meeting were:  Candy Shweder, Chairman, Joan Malkin, Vice Chairman, Pam Goff, Bob Hungerford, Chris Murphy, Maureen Eisner and Chuck Hodgkinson.  Matt Cramer, Leo Desorcy and Chris Alley also attended.  Russell Maloney and Sandy Broyard did not attend.  

The meeting came to order at 12:30 PM.   

PUBLIC HEARING LOCAL BYLAW ONLY (NO DEP FILE #); CHRIS ALLEY AND MICHAEL BARCLAY FOR CHRISTINA LURIE; 2 Gosnold’s Way; AP 14-1:               Ms. Shweder opened the public hearing at 12:31 PM.  Mr. Alley explained that while clearing the NHESP-approved area for a planned tennis court an isolated wetland was discovered adjacent to court’s location putting it within the 100-foot buffer zone of the land subject to flooding and isolated wetland.  He reviewed a revised site plan dated 11/15/16 for a tennis court, fencing around the perimeter and a viewing deck.  The closest activity is approximately 9 feet from the wetland edge.  He added they would like to try and keep the tennis court within the NHESP-approved clearing footprint for the 40-acre parcel and avoid resubmitting the plan if it was located outside the footprint.  He also noted a proposed elevated walkway with four helical support posts that spans over the isolated wetland and connects the walking path from the house to the tennis court.

After much discussion about the court’s surface and the drainage plan the Commission commented that there must be a better location within the 40-acre parcel of land and one that is farther from the wetland and drainage swale.  If the NHESP needs to approve a different location then so be it.  It also requested additional detail on the court drainage plan and cross-sections of the tennis court, elevated walkway and the proposed grading elevations for the area.  A motion was subsequently made to deny the plan as proposed.  The motion was not seconded.

Mr. Alley agreed to address the Commission’s concerns and requested the hearing be continued to January18, 2017 @ 12:30 PM.  A motion was made to grant the request.  The motion was seconded.  In discussion the Commission outlined its expectations as follows:  1. Relocate the tennis court, deck and fencing farther from the wetland and secure the NHESP approval before returning.  2.  The revised plans should include cross section diagrams for the tennis court, deck and site grading, the elevated walkway and a specific recommendation for the walkway deck surface.  The motion passed unanimously with six in favor.   

FOLLOW UP DISCUSSION AND REVISED PLANS NOI SE 12 - 782; CHRIS ALLEY AND MATT CRAMER FOR DAVID ARONOFF; 76 Menemsha Inn Rd.; AP 21-33:      Mr. Alley returned to review specific portions of the plans that were not approved as outlined in the special conditions –Phase I # 7 and Phase II #4.  He explained they have revised solutions for the viewing platform and chimney (Phase I # 7) and the garage and driveway on the east side of the house and 20 feet from the BVW edge (Phase II # 4).  

Phase II # 4:  Mr. Alley proposed adding a retaining wall at the edge of the driveway closest to the wetland.  The new plan places the driveway 21 feet from the wetland versus the original plan at 17.4 feet from the wetland edge.

Phase I # 7:  The revised proposal moved the viewing deck back to the farthest edge of the current house’s footprint – away from the stream and Vineyard Sound.  They would only need one bridge over the stream and the existing foot path from the planned new house to the viewing deck would be abandoned.

The Commission reiterated that this is a large project that is almost completely within a BVW buffer zone; the buffer zone of a perennial stream and with the Riverfront Area.  The Commission did not approve either proposal and asked the applicant to consider returning with cross sections of all elements and the proposed grading plan for the entire site.  Mr. Alley agreed and thanked the Commission for its time.

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE CHRIS YEOMANS; SE 12 – 334; 86 Stonewall Road;          AP 32-71:  Chuck H. explained an Order was issued in 1998 to build a small addition to the existing dwelling within the buffer zone of a BVW draining into a Coastal Pond.  The addition was 25 feet from the wetland edge.  After reviewing photos of the house he recommended the project is in full compliance with the Order.  A motion was made to accept the recommendation and issue the Certificate of Compliance.  The motion was seconded and unanimously approved with six in favor.

DISCUSSION EVERETT POOLE; DIVISION OF FISHERIES (DF) PERMIT DF-520; Map 33 Lot 77:  Mr. Poole reviewed two permits issued in 1970 and 1974 to his father for the boathouse, bulkhead, allowed dredging and other features of this small area on Nashaquitsa Pond.  He then reviewed the maintenance plans for the existing boathouse; dredging maintenance of the shoal in front of the bulkhead; the need to only add a sister plank on top of the bulkhead and the installation of a skiff hauling ramp on spiles to avoid bottom disturbance.  He added the 4-6 scoops of shoal fill will be placed upland in the field as outlined in the permit.  He also explained the proposed skidway planks secured to spiles would allow him to haul his skiff without damaging the shoreline—which has unfortunately been the case for over 60 years.  The skidway will be 32 feet long and have support spiles approximately four feet apart.  After reviewing the details of both permits it was agreed all the proposed maintenance plans are within the scope of approved activities.  The Commission also agreed the proposed skidway is an improvement over current conditions and is expressly allowed in Section 3. I. of the 1974 Department of Natural Resources Permit # 769-74-6.  Mr. Poole thanked the Commission for its time.

The November 2, 2016 meeting minutes were reviewed and approved as amended by consensus.

The following document was signed:
        Certificate of Compliance SE 12 – 334; Chris Yeomans; AP 32-71.

With no further business to discuss the meeting adjourned at 1:45 PM.
Respectfully submitted by Chuck Hodgkinson, C.A.S.

Return to Home Page
Chilmark Town Offices: Chilmark Town Offices: 401 Middle Road, P.O. Box 119 02535-0119