Spokesmen for the Vineyard Golf Club last week formally withdrew their plans to build nine luxury homes for club members.
The withdrawal cleared the way for the Martha’s Vineyard Commission to approve a scaled-down version of the project, calling only for the construction of an employee dormitory and a stand-alone bathroom on the course.
At the start of Thursday’s regular commission meeting, chairman Douglas Sederholm read a letter from project engineer Dick Barbini stating the Edgartown golf club was withdrawing its plan for member housing.
The letter asked the commission to continue deliberations on the two other components of the project: an 11-bed employee dormitory and a small bathroom that will be built in a wooded area on the golf course.
The golf club’s decision to forgo the luxury homes came after the commission’s land use planning committee voted 5-1 with two abstentions last month to recommend denial of the proposal. The commission approved plans for the golf course along the Edgartown-West Tisbury Road in 1999 with a condition that explicitly prohibited member housing. The only housing allowed by the commission was for club employees.
In the recent proposal, golf club spokesmen wanted modification of the condition prohibiting member housing.
At a public hearing last month, some members of the public and commissioners questioned the modification when the commission explicitly prohibited member housing nine years ago.
After the golf club withdrew the housing plan last week, some commissioners admitted they had forgotten about the other aspects of the proposal.
“Since we spent so much time on the member housing, could someone please refresh my recollection about the staff housing?” Mr. Sederholm asked.
Mr. Barbini said the new employee dormitory would give the golf course more flexibility to separate male and female employees. Commissioners spent little time debating the scaled-back project.
“Housing the staff is a good thing, having bathrooms is a good thing,” commissioner Linda Sibley said.
The commission approved the proposal 10-0; voting yes were James Athearn, John Breckenridge, Chris Murphy, Mimi Davisson, Susan Shea, Richard Toole, Andrew Woodruff, James Powell, Mr. Sederholm and Ms. Sibley.