The town of Oak Bluffs is moving forward with its plans for a park and ride lot to help alleviate summer traffic downtown, but during a public hearing Tuesday some expressed concern that the project was moving too quickly.
Selectmen approved a schedule for the proposed route at their Feb. 26 meeting, with buses running from 8 a.m. to 7 p.m., with a break from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m. The bus will pick up passengers at a town-owned lot behind the Catholic Parish Hall, which is at the corner of Pacific avenue and School street.
The total cost for the program is $39,193.18. The town’s share is $11,757. Mr. Santoro said that the state’s share is expected to be $27,435. The lot would be gravel, not paved, with construction done by the Oak Bluffs highway department. The Vineyard Transit Authority plans to have the park and ride on its summer schedule.
The Oak Bluffs planning board is having a site plan review for the project on March 26.
Selectman Michael Santoro noted that the park and ride was intended to be a short term solution, and that the town was looking into a more permanent solution at the landfill. That would be similar to Tisbury’s park and ride, which is at a capped landfill and also features a solar array.
Board chairman Gregory Coogan read a letter from the Oak Bluffs Association, which noted that employees working late night hours would opt not to use the lot, and said that a fuller schedule should be implemented. A letter from the group's president Dennis daRosa echoed the sentiment.
“I couldn’t agree more,” Mr. Coogan said. “But we can’t afford it.”
Two members of the public spoke at the hearing, with planning board member Brian Packish saying he had concerns with the implementation process and homeowner Dorothy Underwood objecting to the lack of communication from the town.
“You haven’t talked to the most important people, the people who live here,” she said. “It was so sudden...wait two years, and put it at the dump.” Mrs. Underwood also said she was also concerned about the number of cars that would use the lot, saying that the ebb and flow would create noise throughout the day, and that the board should have a hearing in the summer, when seasonal residents are around.
“You don’t need to rush through this without the people being here,” Mrs. Underwood said. “This is a terrible, rotten deal.”
Mr. Packish said that members of the Oak Bluffs streetscape group as well as those on the planning board were disappointed by the planning process, and that not enough people had been consulted. He said the town building inspector would be sending letters to abutters within 300 feet of the lot before the site plan review.
Mr. Santoro said he was surprised by Mr. Packish’s comment because he had previously voted as a member of the roads and byways committee to move the proposal forward to selectmen.
“I put all efforts forward to try to increase outreach,” Mr. Packish said.
Selectmen closed the hearing shortly after and said they would work to create a committee to look into some of the issues raised.
In other business, town administrator Robert Whritenour reported that as Oak Bluffs entered the third quarter of fiscal year 2015, 69.5 per cent of the budget had been spent.
“It’s a healthy sign to be five percent lagging,” he said. “It’s very important over the next three months to...stay under 100 per cent of the budget.” Mr. Whritenour said that the town’s preliminary fiscal year 2016 budget was balanced. A public hearing on the budget was held Thursday.
Selectman Kathy Burton said that she had been receiving many questions regarding whether she was moving away from the Vineyard.
“I just wanted to say that I’m not leaving the Island, I’m staying right here,” Ms. Burton said. Ms. Burton is running for re-election to the board.
The board approved the appointment of Tim Millerick as a full time police officer. Last year the town voted to expand the department to 16 personnel. Mr. Millerick, who began working in Oak Bluffs as a summer officer in 2012, was “top on our list for our hiring,” police chief Erik Blake said.
Comments (3)
Comments
Comment policy »