The potential economic benefits of moving a shipyard’s operations to an Oak Bluffs location have trumped any environmental and locational concerns raised by nearby residents.
The Martha’s Vineyard Commission voted 11-2, with one abstention, on Thursday to allow Martha’s Vineyard Shipyard, located on Beach Road in Vineyard Haven, to construct a nautical workshop at 49 Holmes Hole Road in Oak Bluffs.
The Oak Bluffs territory juts into Tisbury in a triangular shape, and it has been a topic of rancor in the past several months over whether commercial activity should occur in what some call an environmentally sensitive area.
Thursday’s decision follows two public hearings where neighbors of the proposed location lambasted the move as environmentally damaging and detrimental to the neighborhood. Supporters, meanwhile, who included employees of the shipyard, argued it was a necessary step to retreat from rising sea levels and preserve jobs for Vineyard families.
Nicholas DeRose, one of the neighbors who had been a vocal opponent of the project, told The Times after the decision that he thinks the commission needs to update its evaluation process as “more projects encroach upon the rural and wooded areas of the Island.”
The neighbors will be following the project as the shipyard continues its hearing for a special permit from the Oak Bluffs planning board. But DeRose said neighbors weren’t planning any litigation against the commission over the decision.
DeRose also said that further consideration of the project was warranted, given that Oak Bluffs is reopening a discussion on turning the area into a light industrial/mixed-use overlay district. With hardly any commercial space in Oak Bluffs, planning officials raised the idea as a way to provide space for business and industry, but voters soundly rejected the proposal at the annual town meeting in April.
“I am looking to find legal counsel that could support us with this effort, but this is not easy on the Island,” DeRose said.
Despite the overwhelming vote in favor of the project on Thursday, commissioners were divided on some aspects of the proposal.
The commissioners were particularly split on whether the project would be an environmental detriment, especially since it would be constructed in what is now woodlands, and would require clear-cutting. The MVC’s Land Use Planning Committee members were also split — four members agreeing that it was a detriment to the area, and four saying it was neutral — although they eventually recommended moving the project forward to the full commission in a 6-1 vote on Sept. 30.
On Thursday, more than half of the commissioners viewed the project as an environmental detriment to the area.
Tisbury representative Ben Robinson, who was against the project, opposed the proposal largely because of its location and the environmental impact. He argued that the project’s type and scale were inappropriate for the proposed area, which would clear woodlands, and could add a burden to Tisbury’s resources.
The applicants have offered some ways to lower their impact to the neighborhood, such as using vegetative screening to minimize the visual impact, adjusting lighting plans to have less of an impact, and supplying fire extinguishers and installing a second gate exclusively for firefighters.
However, there were several components of the project that swayed the vote in the affirmative, like the use of renewable energy from a planned solar array, and the promise of jobs for year-round Vinyarders.
Ultimately, the commission approved the project with a series of conditions, including limiting the outdoor boat work to shrink-wrapping on a concrete pad, a final 25-year stormwater drainage plan, and the prohibition of storing “flammable paints, solvents, or chemicals” on the property unless a proper containment method was secured, like a fireproof container or a tank.
I hope the people who did that study of how much carbon
is stored on MV will plug this loss of trees into their
program and let us know how many shrubs we have to
plant to offset it to keep us “green”
Absolutely against clearing any woodlands. The next thing they will propose for this site is a firewood stand to sell all the trees they cleared. But the upside is the burning of cheap “clean firewood” to heat your home.
Are you absolutely against anything that creates well paying jobs?
Relative to oil firewood is the clean way to heat your house.
Wind and solar are cleaner still.
Albert, we need more creativity regarding renewable energy. How are we going to store excess electricity? How can we turn the heat stored in the oceans into electricity? Are you familiar with the paint that collects energy like a solar panel? More ideas 💡 are needed.
Almost every decision by the Martha’s Vineyard Commission is wrong so much for protecting neighborhoods and people who live there. A commercial operation in a residential zone does not make sense. I would assume none of the commissioners live near this. Hopefully the town has some control over how to prevent this commercial operation which will destroy the aesthetics and roads of the area forever.
Have you been by this property? You have to pass many commercial buildings which are practically next door to it.
Almost every thing the MVC does that helps to create good jobs is wrong.
This kind of commerical work should be done off Island.
It’s messy and ugly.
We should not have to see it.
Congrats to the Shipyard! Well done.
I hope they do sell the wood cut down on their property. its a good revenue stream with how much firewood goes for out here.
It’s a great property for an inland boatyard; I’m happy for them. Let’s get a liquor store next to that neck of the woods!
Comments are closed.