Pennywise Path Gets Subcommittee's Nod

Martha's Vineyard Commission to Give Final Consideration
Thursday; List of Conditions Attached

By JULIA WELLS

A key subcommittee of the Martha's Vineyard Commission voted
last night to recommend approval of the Pennywise Path affordable
housing project in Edgartown, along with a hefty list of conditions
aimed at softening the blow to both the neighborhood and the environment
from 60 rental units.

"I'm not going to be satisfied unless there are
conditions that take into account that there are threatened and
endangered species in there," declared commission member Linda
Sibley, who chaired the meeting of the land use planning subcommittee.

The comment came during a discussion about possible conditions
- including restrictions on outdoor lighting - to protect a
frost pocket located in the middle of the proposed development.

The town wants to build the 60-unit government-subsidized rental
housing complex on 12 acres in the outskirts of the Ocean Heights
section of Edgartown. The property abuts the 118-acre Pennywise Path
Preserve, a Martha's Vineyard Land Bank property that the town
took in an eminent domain purchase five years ago. At the time of the
taking, some 57 acres were set aside for future municipal use.

The town has an agreement with The Community Builders, Inc., to
build and manage the 60-unit housing project. The largest nonprofit
urban housing developer in the country, Community Builders is based in
Boston. The housing project - first of its kind in the town
- is planned as a mix of low and moderate income rental
apartments.

Filed under Chapter 40B, a state law that governs low and moderate
income housing projects, the project is under review by the commission
as a development of regional impact (DRI).

The full commission is set to vote on the housing project on
Thursday night.

Last night eight members of the commission worked their way through
a draft list of conditions.

Among other things, commission members agreed that the project must
be connected to the town sewer and that tenant preference should be
given to Edgartown residents first and residents of Martha's
Vineyard second.

There has been much discussion about access to the housing project.
The developers had originally planned to offer two access roads -
one through 12th street from the Edgartown Vineyard Haven Road, and a
second access through Metcalf Drive, a road that comes in from the West
Tisbury Road and runs alongside the Vineyard Golf Club.

But problems cropped up with the second access because it would
require removing a conservation restriction from a portion of the golf
club property. Removing a conservation restriction is a complicated
business that requires an act of the state legislature, among other
things.

In the end the project developers said they could not wait for the
second access, and the project is now planned using only one access road
- via 12th street.

Last night the land use planning committee decided that a second
access through Metcalf Drive would in fact be a detriment, not a benefit
and members voted to adopt a condition requiring that the access to the
project be limited to 12th street.

"Where is there a need for a second access?" said
commission member Paul Strauss.

"Personally I think [an access through] Metcalf could create
more traffic," said commission member John Breckenridge.

"I'd like to add my name to the group that thinks
Metcalf makes things worse," said Mrs. Sibley.

There was some discussion about limiting parking in the development
as a way to mitigate the traffic impacts on both 12th street and the
Edgartown-Vineyard Haven Road, but in the end commission members
abandoned the idea. Michael Donaroma, an Edgartown selectmen who
attended the meeting, suggested that the town study the traffic impacts
two years after the development is built and return to the commission
with the results.

Protection for the frost pocket spawned a lengthy discussion about
outdoor lighting, and sparks flew briefly when Mrs. Sibley clashed with
a spokesman for the development company over the plan to put lights on a
crosswalk.

Charles Eisenberg insisted that the lights were important for
safety, but Mrs. Sibley disagreed.

"There is no lighting at crosswalks anywhere in town -
we don't have lighting at crosswalks on Martha's Vineyard
and people aren't getting hit," she said, adding in testy
tones: "That's why you can see the Milky Way here and you
can't see it anywhere else."

There was no move to reduce the size of the project.

In the end the land use planning committee voted 7-0 with one
abstention to recommend approval of the project with conditions.