The commission voted unanimously Thursday night to approve a project to redevelop the Tisbury Marine Terminal as a maintenance staging area for the Vineyard Wind project.
Amid passionate statements about the urgent need to address the global climate crisis, the Martha’s Vineyard Commission voted unanimously Thursday night to approve a massive project to redevelop the Tisbury Marine Terminal as a maintenance staging area for the Vineyard Wind project.
The project is the largest waterfront development on the Vineyard in recent memory, and includes the creation of a new 40,000-square-foot pier deck and bulkhead on the Vineyard Haven harbor, three vessel berthing areas and more than 70,000 square feet of underwater dredging. Six new jobs will be created, with annual salaries ranging from $77,000 to $100,000, according to the application.
In an ongoing pattern, the two and a half-hour meeting Thursday led by MVC chairman Joan Malkin saw commissioners bog down heavily at times over procedural details.
But in the end, commissioners threw their strongest support to the marine terminal project, deciding that the benefits far outweighed the detriments.
During deliberations, they also acknowledged bluntly that the project will have a significant environmental impact on the Tisbury harborfront.
“Few projects we see have any benefits to the environment including this one,” commissioner Ben Robinson said. “It is a detriment — it’s going to be built over a barrier beach . . . we should just accept these detriments to the environment and weigh them against the benefit of this facility for the town.”
Commissioner Jim Vercruysse agreed. “The overall project may be a benefit, but I can’t see that dredging hundreds of feet of the ocean environment and cantilevering a pier out over the water is anything but a detriment,” he said.
But commissioner Kathy Newman urged a wider view.
“You have to remember the big environment” she said in part. “There are so many things to be gained from this . . . there are some problems but let’s not let the whole project be dragged down by it . . . it’s for the big environment and I think we have to put that into perspective.”
The development will expand and modify the R.M. Packer Company’s marine terminal at the far end of Beach Road in Vineyard Haven in two parts. The northern section of the property will remain part of the marine terminal barging operations. Improvements include a new pier and ramps, with a future plan to increase barging capacity. That part of the plan also won praise from commissioners Thursday.
The property’s undeveloped southern section will be rebuilt as a staging area for offshore wind farm maintenance, including the pier deck, vessel berths and a nearly 200-foot bulkhead that stretches into the harbor.
Ralph Packer, who owns the terminal, will lease the property to New Bedford-based Vineyard Wind, which is beginning construction on an 800-megawatt wind farm 15 miles south of the Island. The terms of the lease are not known.
The project is under review by the commission as a development of regional impact (DRI); a public hearing was held Sept. 23, with the written record closing Oct. 4. Numerous other permits are still needed at the state, federal and local level. A related project to build 50 units of workforce residential housing at the site of the former Hinckley’s property on Beach Road is expected to come before the commission at some point as a separate DRI.
Discussion was wide ranging Thursday night, as commissioners wrangled with language in conditions and debated how to apply their affordable housing policy to the project.
The project developers have made no affordable housing offer in their application, suggesting that the six workers will be earning salaries that will allow them to rent or buy market-rate housing.
Commission chairman Joan Malkin said at any rate the project doesn’t fit precisely with the MVC affordable housing policy for commercial development.
“We could do nothing, we could wait until the next DRI [for the workforce housing] comes along, or we could find some sort of rationale for collecting a fee. But we do not have a rationale for collecting a fee [with this project] under our current policy,” Ms. Malkin said.
Commissioner Linda Sibley underscored the dearth of housing in general on the Vineyard at the moment.
“There’s a lack of housing on the Vineyard, not just a lack of affordable housing . . . and that concerns me,” Ms. Sibley said.
The plan leaves room for a future expanded barging operation from the newly built terminal, including possibly for hauling solid waste from the Vineyard. But any such expansion would require a return to the MVC as well as a modification of a 2011 agreement between R.M. Packer and the Steamship Authority that spells out what materials can be barged from the private facility.
Commissioner Ted Rosbeck ultimately joined the unanimous vote in favor of the project, but aired his ambivalence more than once.
“Something about this project rubs me the wrong way,” Mr. Rosbeck said. “I’m not against Vineyard Wind, I think it’s all needed . . . I’m just a little shocked that it’s never come up that we’re just giving away the rights to this water . . . it just seems odd that it’s never discussed. If you look at this plan, the majority of it sits over water . . . I’m just stunned that we’re just giving that away . . . [and] that we’re not talking about that issue. “I wanted to raise it and see if I’m the only one in the room who thinks it’s crazy.”
Commissioner Josh Goldstein, the appointed voting member from Tisbury, said he had been asked by town leaders to convey their strong support.
“I was contacted by my appointing authority they want to convey how important this project is for the town,” Mr. Goldstein said. “They ask that you let other authorities do their work and keep it as clean and simple as we can.”
And despite its large scale, commissioners also expressly noted the project’s appropriateness for Vineyard Haven’s working waterfront.
“This is not going to be lovely but it is consistent with the working waterfront which is part of the character of the town of Tisbury,” commissioner Linda Sibley said. “This is probably the only place on this Island that could readily accommodate this facility.”
Mr. Robinson, a lifelong resident of the town, echoed the theme.
“I grew up on the harbor . . . it’s a working waterfront . . . and it dates to colonial times,” Mr. Robinson said. “The benefits of this working harbor [rival] the beauty of Edgartown.”
He also praised the town for its forward thinking approach in establishing the working waterfront many years ago through the commission’s district of critical planning concern (DCPC) process.
“Restrictions on the harborfront through the DCPC have been debated . . . and at the time [they were developed] no one could have contemplated offshore wind,” Mr. Robinson said.
“But if that had not been done, this might not have happened. The foresight of the town to protect the working waterfront has allowed this to happen. That foresight should be recognized.”
Comments
Good morning, I grew up on
Lorraine EdgartownGood morning, I grew up on working waterfronts and have lived on them most of my considerably long life. This, however, is going to mushroom into something almost no one will want when it is done and in operation. This entire group affection for windmills is alarming. What will they look like in years to come when we find alternative means of energy? Will they be dismantled by the people who built them? Are there bond issues to pay for the cleanup when they are obsolete? Have any of you seen the abandoned factories in the Rust Belt? Miles and miles of abandoned buildings no one has cleaned up, just take a gander at some of the abandoned factories in Detroit, Fall River, New England towns when the mills were no longer used? Think of this mess on the island, this beautiful island, and South of us, with giant, awful, rusted windmills littering the seascape. I have traveled the world, often, and have seen all areas and kinds of alternative energy being used. Am I being a NIMBY? Quite possibly, but we are an island, we cannot afford to make mistakes without having an impact on our surroundings. Pity, but the virtue signalers are out in force.
Lorraine, a few minutes of
robert skydell Granada Nicaragua,Lorraine, a few minutes of actual research would have provided definitive answers to your first three questions and rendered the rest of your post unnecessary if not moot.
Yes, there are bond issues in place for the decommisioning and rempoval of wind turbines once they become obsolete or are abandoned, quiete unlike nearly all of the industrial relics you refer to that litter the American landscape.
So misguided. Do you think
Kelce Oak BluffsSo misguided. Do you think pipelines are attractive? How about Supertankers? Fracking works for you? Oh, and refineries look and smell beautiful, too? And coal mines? Yeah, keep digging them? I'll take windmills over anything else I just mentioned, thank you.
It is so incredibly sad that
Slater MVIt is so incredibly sad that you believe that windmills are a viable alternative. SMH
Slater - so what's your
Jeremy EdgartownSlater - so what's your solution?
One of the most exciting
Schools Out Vineyard HavenOne of the most exciting projects to come to VH in decades. A new school and much needed enhancements to our working harbor are going to turn the perception of VH being in decline. Now, can town leaders work with Stop&Shop instead of fighting them?
I'm sure this will enhance
Michael Marcus West TisburyI'm sure this will enhance the beauty of VH Harbor because the Town executes so well on other projects. 5 corners, beautiful Stop&Shop...I mean this sounds gorgeous for the new welcome mat to the tourism that is the life blood of the Island! How about a Master Plan for the water front that doesn't look like rust and decay? Who profits from this? Gross
This is a godsend for
Frank Brunelle Vineyard HavenThis is a godsend for immigration. When Ted Cruz suggested Martha's Vineyard to process tens of thousand of immigrants he knew we were building out into the harbor and destroying our sailing traditions and was jumping for joy at the thought of all that beautiful waterfront land as a processing center. Of course, Vineyard Wind will have to have first dibs on the primary destruction of our way of life. It is only fair. But Ted knew the MV Commission was a bunch of saps and would approve this waste of taxpayer dollars mandated by the Federal Government. It will be glorious, the entire project will benefit a handful of people and Vineyard Haven will put yet another foot in the grave it is building. Bravo.
Finally a project that
Vicki Divoll ChilmarkFinally a project that produces good jobs, helps the environment and is not just focused on the almighty tourist dollar. Projects like this harken back to Vineyard Haven as a real town with real people -- a working harbor. The same people who complain about this will then turn around and complain about crowds and traffic. Pick a side!!!!
Hmmm....let's see...no
Islander61 OBHmmm....let's see...no product testing when this is directly on the water. No recycling plan. No uproar about the fact that turbine blades aren't recyclable and are landing in landfills. No water testing plan. No $50,00.0.00 worth of testing on anything being used. Makes me wonder. Doesn't anyone wonder about the power of those who lobby for or against certain things have and how they are affecting the decisions being made? I am puzzled why the Tisbury commissioner says it's such a detriment and was so outspoken against on a recent project that would benefit the youth of the island says this is OK because it will benefit the Tisbury waterfront.
The MVC hearing on a high
James Oak BluffsThe MVC hearing on a high School playing field was more scrutinized than this monstrosity is proof why the MVC is no longer needed.
Sadly, I have to agree. The
Katherine Scott TisburySadly, I have to agree. The MVC seems to have outlived its usefulness.
Have any commissioners read the mission statement lately?
Perhaps it should be read out before every hearing and meeting.
Both projects demand major levels of scrutiny.
On the playing fields, after major scrutiny, the MVC voted wrong. Then it tried to suppress its own minority report.
On this massive boondoggle---fueled by tax dollars and a lot of misconceptions and romantic ideas about wind power plants---after little scrutiny, they have voted wrong again.
Michael Wild must be turning in his grave.
Is there a way for the MV
Bob BrooksIs there a way for the MV residents to vote on the project?
No. Offshore Wind is building
Jason EdgartownNo. Offshore Wind is building federal property. Tisbury approved this. MVC approved this. Wind wins. Earth wins.
No, thank god, this concerns
Carlos Degotta TisburyNo, thank god, this concerns Tisbury unless of course you want help from us deciding which beaches to have open to public, mind your own town business
You have to put this together
Terry EdgartownYou have to put this together with the 13 condos to be built down toward the Ferry and the huge housing project proposed for Beach Road. We need to understand that this closes Vineyard Haven out as a desirable place and changes the already awful traffic there into a nightmare. The Commissioners get almost everything almost all the time. The next project they vote on will probably be a benign small development somewhere in the middle of the island and they will squash the powerless little guy to prove what great environmentalists they are.
Can we get a fishing pier out
mike SomewhereCan we get a fishing pier out of this? Monsters under the deck if properly built.
Lets do the right thing and do the rest of the harbor too.
Clean up the mess all the way to the Steamship Authority too.
Add Hinkleys, Let Stop and Shop do their thing.
Could be that image that befits MV.
Just sayin.
Great idea for fishing!
George Stein Oak BluffsGreat idea for fishing! Combined with the development at the former Hinckley site why not federal funding for expansion of waste water treatment and storage capability . Eliminate 5 Corners floods forever . Can be done.
This is so exciting to have
Carlos Degotta TisburyThis is so exciting to have the infrastructure being planed and hopefully construction starting soon, we need to capture the wind power and start a serious national conversation about building modern small nuclear reactors so that we can fully stop using coal with its fine particulates being pumped into our atmosphere and stop fracking which is destroying clean water sources for millions of or population. I want the young people on this island to be able to work in the energy generation field makeing good money and stay and marry and raise their families here on the vineyard long after all the NIMBY privileged few are put to rest.
Criteria for MVC decision:
Frank Brunelle Vineyard HavenCriteria for MVC decision: Were there any? Perhaps if the MVC took the time to study exactly what the impacts would be on our island they would not be so quick to approve a plan of such magnitude. Was there a list of impacts and discussions on each? What will happen to the ability to sail vessels needing to use the entire water surface? What will be the impacts of large vessels and work performed after dark and including the impact on mooring rentals, a large component of town revenue? If the work performed requires lighting and working at night will it damage residents well-being and will it make life living on the harbor a nightmare to be endured? Did the Commission ever actually prepare committees to examine all of these issues and fully understand impacts? I believe the answer is no to all the above and perhaps our MVC is totally lacking in competence therefore.
Agree. It 1 thing to fast
gina Menemsha / NYCAgree. It 1 thing to fast track a massive project , but this MVC handling/lack of due diligence of a Harbor buildout of this size is beyond alarming .. Who needs them ??? Not sure but I think this project still needs a lot more funding to even start.. I know they have bought an old shipyard in Salem for the same purpose as VH operation.. 1 more point does Beach Road really need anymore traffic ???
Vineyard wind will make a
Charlie Callahan So Boston/EdgartownVineyard wind will make a fortune and in ten years when these things need rebuilding they will just walk away and leave all their garbage for the fools who were jumping for joy when it first started and the electric rates will have gone thru the roof.Gas,diesel,or coal are the only proven ways to go and they all have to burn at unbelievably clean methods by law. The smokestacks clean the exhausts to almost zero pollutants.
OK Mr Callahan, now tell us
robert skydell Granada, NicaraguaOK Mr Callahan, now tell us where all the CO2 goes from burning those fossil fuels.
Agree 100 percent. The rate
AJ Smith Linden, NJAgree 100 percent. The rate payers will be left to pay for the clean up and fixing the broken down turbines. Even Green California doesn't allow any additional more wind turbines to be installed.
Put me down as skeptical that
J.P. St.Germain Vineyard HavenPut me down as skeptical that there will be any real benefit. These turbines will be too big for any port close to the Vineyard – their parts will be too enormous. I would rather have a large marina that would actually have daily use during the summer. Unless the project can clearly state what activities they will be supporting – I am guessing that this is a situation where some emergency boats will be tied up and left for dead.
Utilizing this waterfront for a non-use – other than mthly support payments and perpetually docked boats – would be a bad outcome.
Keep in mind these turbines will be close to 7 times bigger than those proposed for Cape Wind a decade ago. Orders of magnitude too large for anything meaningful to be supported from this location.
I'm glad it's finally going
Nathan Vineyard HavenI'm glad it's finally going to happen . The process has taken so long that I stopped paying attention years ago so forgive me if any of what I say has been addressed . This project is huge and the activity generated is certainly going to make our tiny harbor busier than ever . If this dock is going to extend another 200ft . into the harbor with 40,000ft. of added pier capacity isn't this going to affect the Steamship Authority route ? I would like to see an aerial drawing of what is being proposed . ( maybe I missed that in another article ). The electric cables will go ashore on the Cape and so of course we don't get a discount because we've made any kind of sacrifice on our harbor . I believe the six new jobs are union jobs that will go to highly skilled techs . Is there any guarantee that these jobs go to island residents ? I know we have to make sacrifices to save the planet but in the end I don't want to see our tiny port turned into another New Bedford .
So a group of city slickers
Bob OB on the farmSo a group of city slickers is selling those country bumpkins on the Vineyard millions of dollars in outdated technology. There are bladeless wind turbines now for starters, amongst some of the newer, less destructive technologies and cheaper. The wildlife? I'm going to cry now...
Latest climate news from NOAA
Frank Brunelle Vineyard HavenLatest climate news from NOAA. https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-cha…
The fact of the matter with offshore wind power is that it will make little difference in reducing Co2 globally. We are in the midst of a carbon dioxide spike mainly due to coal powered plants and greater demand. An analogy for the problem would be something like a house being on fire and someone shows up with good intentions but brings a solid gold squirt gun to the fire. Co2 historically started to be measured when the rate of change was around .85 ppm year over year and is now at 2.4 ppm year over year and increasing rapidly. There was the thought at MVC (Martha's Vineyard Commission) that we should aim for Co2 net zero by 2050. Then the MVC said 2040 was the required date, but scientists now agree that we must reduce Co2 by 2030 or it will be too late. Obviously we will not meet any net zero date as we are already within 9 years of the target and going in the opposite direction. And so why are we sacrificing our harbor and increasing Co2 locally on a massive scale when it will literally do no good. Perhaps our MVC could respond to this question. If Vineyard Wind wants to build offshore wind towers with endangered right whales on the brink of extinction, and if the project causes the extinction, will this not lie at the feet of the MVC commissioners as well?
Can’t even imagine these
Wally OBCan’t even imagine these monstrous things overlooking our beautiful island! It’s the hip thing to do now and they will be abandoned when the next “new thing” comes along. What about our wildlife -birds gulls fish that die from these ? I cringe at the thought.
12 miles away will be the
Tim Johnson Vineyard Haven12 miles away will be the nearest turbine.
One mile spacing between them after that.
Do you stand on the Northern Shoreline and complain the
Wind Turbines on the Cape? The Turbines in Wareham?
Simply amazing…every major
Jill Powers TisburySimply amazing…every major-along with many minor-decision made, regarding the character/look of our town, has been and continues to be the wrong decision.
I agree with Ted Rosbeck. No
Patricia EdgartownI agree with Ted Rosbeck. No discussion about losing the beautiful waterfront-This is crazy!
Vineyard Wind will be over
Mary NantucketVineyard Wind will be over the critically endangered North Atlantic Right Whale habitat. Recent NARW Consortium reports the population has sunk to 337, with less than 100 breeding females. Scientists testified in a comment letter, the whales cannot withstand another layer of stress. NOAA acknowledges the leading cause of death for these whales is vessel strikes and entanglement. BOEM concludes the construction will not jeopardize the species, yet NOAA fisheries has grated the developers a license to “take” the whales during construction.
Q: Do the purported benefits outweigh the damage?
Add new comment