<p>Developers who want to turn 54 acres off Meetinghouse Way into 34 house lots presented a slightly altered plan Thursday.</p>
Developers who want to turn 54 acres off Meeting House Way in Edgartown into 34 house lots presented a slightly altered plan to the Martha’s Vineyard Commission Thursday.
A public hearing opened in February. The plan for Meeting House Place calls for creating three clusters of buildable lots on the wooded property in the rural perimeters of Edgartown. It is the first market-rate subdivision to come before the commission for review as a development of regional impact (DRI) in many years. Douglas Anderson of Salt Lake City, Utah, and his business partners bought the property in 2017 for $6.6 million.
On Thursday Mr. Anderson attended the continued hearing with Island attorney Sean Murphy and engineer Doug Hoehn. Changes to the plan include reducing the maximum home size from 5,000 square feet and nine bedrooms to 4,800 square feet and five bedrooms, and committing to a net zero nitrogen impact by installing a permeable reactive barrier around the property. Mr. Anderson is also offering to eventually contribute some $1.1 million to affordable housing, beginning with a lump sum payment of $490,000, followed by additional contributions for every lot that is sold and resold.
The subdivision is proposed for an environmentally sensitive area. Three ancient ways cross the property, and some 17 acres are listed as habitat for the rare imperial moth under the state Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program. Developers have offered to preserve some rare habitat on the site and contribute funding for off-site research.
The development would connect to town water and sewer, but at the hearing in February, commission water quality planner Sheri Casseau said it still would add significant amounts of nitrogen to the overloaded watershed for the Edgartown Great Pond. After a water expert for the developers disputed her report, the commission decided to hire an independent expert, at the developer’s expense, to review the numbers.
On Thursday commissioners questioned why the lots aren’t more heavily clustered to allow for communal open space, rather than individual conservation restrictions on each lot.
“This ends up with a lot of fragmentation between the open space,” said commissioner Ben Robinson. “Whereas you could accomplish real open space with a large, segregated lot that is protected.”
Commissioner Joan Malkin agreed, saying the commission’s policy was to have open space created first, before the lots, and in a single, discrete portion not owned by the homeowners.
Mr. Anderson replied that according to market research, it would be much more difficult to sell smaller, more heavily clustered lots because buyers want the conservation restrictions in their backyards rather than in a communal lot.
“It’s hard to sell a 15,000-square-foot pad,” Mr. Anderson said. “We found that homeowners take pride in collectively managing their individual conservation easements.”
During public comment there were continued concerns about environmental impacts and appropriateness of the project.
The offer by developers to mitigate the nitrogen load on the watershed by installing a permeable reactive barrier and individual irrigation wells on each property came under scrutiny. Emily Reddington, executive director of the Edgartown Great Pond Foundation, doubted the efficacy of a permeable reactive barrier considering the size and scope of the development.
“I don’t know if you can put [a permeable reactive barrier] on this property and catch the nitrogen you are going to catch,” she said. “I feel like we have a lot more questions than answers . . . that seems like a really lofty goal.”
Luanne Johnson, an Island biologist and executive director of BioDiversity Works who has raised concerns about the presence of the Northern long-eared bat in the area, said the forest would be best preserved with a more clustered development.
“It’s beautiful, prime pitch-pine and oak woodland,” Ms. Johnson said. “I think condensing this development would be a better way to see it.”
And James Athearn, whose family owns the nearby Morning Glory Farm, continued to strongly oppose the project.
“I think it’s obvious that the so-called open space is really just people’s backyards,” Mr. Athearn said. “And the word cluster, it’s about as far from cluster as you can get. It’s basically suburban sprawl.”
Commissioners continued the public hearing to May 16.
In other business, the commission unanimously approved a large campus expansion plan for The Yard, the Chilmark dance colony. The plans will include renovating and winterizing the campus and building a new performance barn.
Before construction can begin, the Yard will have to submit a final stormwater management plan to the commission.
MVC executive director Adam Turner also reported that longtime DRI coordinator Paul Foley had taken a position in Fairhaven as a planning and community development official with the town.
“Paul was here for 15 years and contributed a lot of things,” Mr. Turner said. “You might get people who can do parts of the things he did, but to have one person be as effective in what he was asked to do was really unique and special.”
Mr. Turner said Mr. Foley’s last day was April 19.

Comments
Paul was a great asset to the
Bob EdgartownPaul was a great asset to the MVC and the Island he will be missed and not easily replaced. With 54 acres and 1/2 acre zoning and only 34 lots being sought for makes this as low an impact as one could expect. All of the people who have come out against this live in a home that was built and changed the area they were in. Sounds like NIMBY to me and even worse some want no more building anywhere.
34 lots, each with a 5,000 sq
Big Picture View Edgartown34 lots, each with a 5,000 sq. ft. house with 9 bedrooms is not my idea of island housing...it is investment in a rental property! Will they each have a pool? A reduction of only 200 sq. ft. but a limit of 5 bedrooms makes me think there will be a few illegal bedrooms! And again, not a house that many year-rounders would buy. If this development was designed to fill a need rather than to maximize return on investment, perhaps the neighbors would be more supportive. I think the island is suffering from rental fatigue and a real family housing shortage at all price points, as well as a justifiable lack of trust of off-islanders to caretake the fragile and precious ecosystem. NIMBY? In this case, they are right to be wary of outsiders building for the sole benefit of people like themselves.
Your bedroom count is wrong
Bob EdgartownYour bedroom count is wrong as it never was 9 started at 7 and now just 5 per lot. Again very low impact for this size of acreage. This is Island housing for those wanting to spend part of the year here. And this project will do more for affordable housing on the Island than any other project has in the history of the island. If all future developments follow the lead of this group we will get a great revenue stream for year round housing. But to get year round housing we need to increase density on vacant land to make it affordable.
Illegal bedrooms in a 5,000
Mark EdgartownIllegal bedrooms in a 5,000 sq foot house...I think not. I hate to break it to you, but investing in real estate is about return on investment. Challenge you to find a developer that says otherwise. I personally would rather nothing being developed on the land and it be preserved, thank you Land Bank.
The above letter sounds very
All Island caring EdgartownThe above letter sounds very Republic. Just let a group of off Islanders from Utah walk into the MVC, and then walk out 35 million dollars richer, leaving us with 34 new homes and guest houses to sort out. This property is in a protected natural heritage habitat zone and a watershed district. Why not just 10-15 homes? Why does the Island have to comply with an off island developer's wishes?
I can tell you do not really
Bob EdgartownI can tell you do not really know what is going on here as no guest houses will be allowed. This project is doing nothing that is not allowed by current regulations and if you think they should be changed start doing the work to change it. We have the MVC looking out for the island and thankfully we did not get what Kenndey wanted many years ago or the whole island would be a natural heritage habitat. And a good chance the house you live in would not be here today.
The developers bought the
John Aldeborgh Edgartown, MAThe developers bought the land to develop it, they wouldn’t have done this if there wasn’t a market need. The more building is restricted the more housing prices (and therefore rents) will increase, this is the basic economic law of supply and demand. Next, all these demands/restrictions only add to the cost of building, further increasing housing costs on the island. Finely, will the members of the MVC retroactively apply the same restrictions on themselves that they are putting on these developers.
The reason we have a MVC is
All Island caring EdgartownThe reason we have a MVC is to reduce density and for environmental protection. Asking a developer to reduce his profits from 35 million to 15 million is not an abuse. If we reduce density where we can, the entire Island benefits, rather than a few guys from Utah.If we don't wake up, in 15 years traffic will be so bad, it will be like Interstate 95. And our single source aquifier has limits also.
If there is real concern
here we go again edgIf there is real concern about nitrogen loading, the sewer plant should stop accepting septage pumpout from OTHER towns. The owner of this property and future owners are taxpayers and deserve the right to hook up to the plant they pay for. As the above poster noted (and I rarely agree with him), its LOW impact.
This is absurd, "Mr. Anderson
Thomas Bena ChilmarkThis is absurd, "Mr. Anderson replied that according to market research, it would be much more difficult to sell smaller, more heavily clustered lots because buyers want the conservation restrictions in their backyards rather than in a communal lot." I agree with James Athearn--this is suburban sprawl--precisely the thing that most Islanders do NOT want to see here. Please MVC commissioners, vote this down.
We have all seen this time
Jayrod Old Purchase Rd EdgartownWe have all seen this time and time again. No matter who goes to build, someone will oppose it. Landowners have rights too, but it would behoove MV to create rules of development from single homes to large tracts so this NIMBY fight doesn't happen every time someone puts a shovel in the ground. I am a birder, naturalist, and lover of all wildlife, but I am tired of the lack of vision, planning and overall development rules that exist in MV. I do not want to make it easy for development but I do want to make it fair.
Add new comment