In the latest chapter of what is already a prolonged application process, supporters and opponents of the controversial Bradley Square renovation project emerged last week from nearly two months of negotiations with a revised plan for the project. The changed plan, which now goes back before the Martha’s Vineyard Commission for fresh review, includes more on-site parking, smaller buildings and one less affordable housing unit.
The revised plans came out of a series of meetings between project backers and the Oak Bluffs Concerned Citizens committee, formed in September among neighbors and residents with concerns about the size and scope of the mixed use project.
Although the revised plan was billed as a solution favored by people on both sides of the controversy, reaction by some members of the concerned citizens group was lukewarm during a meeting last Thursday of the Oak Bluffs zoning board of appeals.
“I think it’s still too large for the area . . . but something is better then nothing. You can’t always get what you want,” said Winthrop avenue resident Mary Ellen Rogers.
“I agree this is still out of context there . . . it’s going to make our little neighborhood feel very much like a big city neighborhood,” said Candace Nichols.
But proponents of the project — including the brokers of the recent compromise — were more upbeat.
“This has been a rewarding experience; it was well-organized, patiently run and it provided a forum for open discourse,” said Richard Leonard, chairman of the board for the Island Housing Trust, one of the project applicants.
The Bradley Square project calls for the redevelopment of the Island’s first African American church on Masonic avenue into a mixed-use complex including three buildings with nine apartments, plus work space for artists and a community center. The Island Affordable Housing Fund paid $905,000 for the property in 2007.
The revised plan calls for the Denniston house, named for the Rev. Oscar Denniston, to remain where it is. Previous plans called for the church to be moved onto a portion of the property that is residentially zoned.
The new plan calls for one of the new buildings, called Bradley One, to be increased in size from 3,793 to 4,140 square feet, but a third floor will be eliminated to reduce the height from 32 to 28 feet. The other new building, Bradley Two, will be reduced in size from 3,792 to 2,962 square feet, also eliminating a planned third floor.
One of the affordable housing units has been eliminated, and new commercial space has been added. A service road planned for the rear of the project has also been eliminated.
All green space between the new buildings is gone, allowing for two parking areas with 20 spaces. A comparison released by the trust this week shows that the economics of the project remain essentially unchanged; the total project cost is estimated at $5 million, with $1.7 million coming from the town of Oak Bluffs and the Island Affordable Housing Fund.
The previous plan called for affordable housing units to sell for between $150,000 and $500,000, with buyers qualifying who earn between 80 to 140 per cent of the average mean income by state standards. New plans call for those same units to sell to qualified buyers for between $150,000 and $450,000.
Last week’s zoning board meeting served as a sounding board for the revised plan, although no vote was taken because the plan was referred back to the commission, which approved the project in June as a development of regional impact (DRI). A new review will now be scheduled before the MVC.
Meanwhile, $400,000 in Community Preservation Act funds previously approved at town meeting for the affordable housing component of the project is up for questioning. At a special town meeting next month voters will consider an article to rescind the funding.
Mr. Leonard said he thought the new plans accomplished everything the Bradley Square project set out to do while also providing a more palatable plan to neighbors.
“I think this plan is better [than the original]. The massing of the buildings is better, it has more parking on-site and the neighborhood can claim more ownership to the design,” he said.
Comments
Comment policy »