A long-envisioned community housing project at Peaked Hill Pastures in Chilmark took a step forward this week when the town select board reviewed a recommendation from the planning board for developing part of the property.
A long-envisioned affordable housing project at Peaked Hill Pastures in Chilmark took a step forward this week when the town select board reviewed a recommendation from the planning board for developing part of the property as community housing.
A planning board subcommittee has been gathering community feedback and exploring concepts for several months for the 16-acre town-owned parcel. A series of six community engagement sessions was held over the summer and early fall.
In the report dated Nov. 22 and released this week, the committee recommends that six acres of the property be developed with roughly 20 units of housing, most of them rental units and a smaller number of owned units.
The project would be designed as a community neighborhood with shared infrastructure, energy efficient building and multi-generational residents.
Some preference would be given to town employees, and the project would serve people earning up to 150 per cent of area median income, with some units reserved for people who earn 80 per cent AMI or less. (In Dukes County the AMI for a household of four is $105,000).
Funding would come from the state, the Community Preservation Act and the Molly Flender Fund, the town’s affordable housing trust, according to the report.
The report recommends that all the units be developed at once using a so-called friendly 40-B under the state statute that allows affordable housing projects to skirt some zoning regulations.
The Flanders Field softball field would be preserved, and the remaining 10 acres would be left open with the potential for recreation or open space projects in the future, according to the report.
“The need for affordable/community housing for all levels of income is urgent Islandwide. We believe that Chilmark must have a role in addressing that need in addition to providing opportunities for Chilmark residents,” the report says. “We want the project to benefit many individuals and families while balancing and respecting the character of the town.”
The report recommends that the select board solicit developer bids by issuing a request for proposals (RFP).
On Tuesday board members praised the report and said they would discuss the next steps at their Dec. 14 meeting.
“This is one of the more important things that we’ve worked on, and I think it’s very important for our town to make this work and make it work successfully for as many people concerned as possible,” said selectman James Malkin.
“We’ve got a lot on the table and the subcommittee has done a terrific job of defining things,” said selectman Warren Doty. “We each go and do some research and work on things . . . and then don’t define next steps until our next meeting.”
In an unrelated housing and zoning matter, the board suggested the addition of a setback provision to a proposed amendment to ease restrictions on undersized homesite lots. The amendment still needs approval at the annual town meeting in April.
“Thank you for the planning board’s work and yes, we’re supportive of this, and make it happen please,” Mr. Malkin said.
In other business, the board agreed to allow the harbor master’s staff to take on more supervisory duties in Menemsha in the summer months. New responsibilities will include directing traffic and maintaining comfort stations.
The idea was introduced at a meeting last month to transfer responsibilities from traffic officers in the police department. The plan would eliminate traffic officers, which are in short supply, harbor master Ryan Rossi said.
“This isn’t about enforcement of laws,” he said last month. “It’s more just about traffic flow and safety.”
The board also voted to:
• Join a statewide opioid settlement case;
• Adopt changes in the job description for the town treasurer position;
• Reappoint Joan Malkin as the town representative to the Martha’s Vineyard Commission.

Comments
When do we have enough
Tom ChilmarkWhen do we have enough affordable housing? I never hear of a number?
Grotesque. What’s wrong with
Otto West TisburyGrotesque. What’s wrong with keeping open space? How does this help “preserve the rural character” of Chilmark, as is called for in the Chilmark Master Plan?
I guess we’re no longer worried about overwhelming the fragile resources of the Island. We’ve moved on to “let’s cram as many people as we can here”.
I thought I was the only otto
Otto osmers ChilmarkI thought I was the only otto on mv.
We can do both. We can
Bob EdgartownWe can do both. We can protect our rural character and create housing, even without creating a whole new develpment. Chilmark has the lowest percentage of year round housing on the island. Here is a link to the Chilmark Housing Production Plan: https://www.mvcommission.org/chilmark-housing-production-plan
For some reason while
gina Menemsha / NYCFor some reason while affordable housing is a necessary noble agenda, the forces behind it never mention how much building out Martha can handle & keep it attractiveness .. That balance isn't getting addressed .. It's an Island people.. Not all of the 600 families on that wait list can realistically get it..
So why do we allow for 100+
Guinevere Cramer Oak BluffsSo why do we allow for 100+ thousand people to come for four months of the year. These 600 families are very fiber of the community that make up the island that people love so much.
The 100k people are the
Mark EdgartownThe 100k people are the tourists and seasonal residents that drive the economy of MV and pay the majority of MV taxes.
Bravo a community minded
George Stein Oak BluffsBravo a community minded program ! Normal folks need a place to raise a family. I apologize for using my actual identity. Forgive me for the confusion.
Anyone know how much forest
JohannaAnyone know how much forest and woodland has been lost over the last 20 months to development? Is there a group of island arborists or tree wardens keeping track of such things? If not, there ought to be because based on the island’s projected development pipeline (for town owned land in Edg, OB, and VH) this is just in terms of deforestation. Why not repurpose existing structures to create some of the much needed affordable housing inventory? There must be a way to provide a path to affordable home ownership and/or year round rentals for island families that doesn’t involve such environmental and ecological devastation. Let’s not buy in to the false choice given by profiteers who say we must choose between housing and protecting the environment. With better planning both are possible.
If affordable housing density
Peter Bruce ChilmarkIf affordable housing density in the up-island towns were concentrated on existing villages, the rural open character of the countryside could be preserved, the new residents could walk to many errands, they would support local shops, use libraries, and not add as much traffic burden as occurs when the housing development is in more remote areas. Having more people live in walkable, bike-able villages is both consistent with the rural character of the island and with increasing affordability.
I could not agree more -
Hal EdgartownI could not agree more - great posting
Bingo. Higher density in
mike SomewhereBingo. Higher density in existing towns - in town. Apartments, not houses.
Yes Peter. You are spot on.
Beka MvYes Peter. You are spot on.
More overdevelopment is not
Mark EdgartownMore overdevelopment is not what the island needs. Poor Martha…
Very glad to see this moving
Elisha Wiesner ChilmarkVery glad to see this moving forward. Looks like it'll be a wonderful place to live.
While the provision of
John Colorado and ChilmarkWhile the provision of affordable housing is noble and necessary, there are pitfalls…which the City of Aspen has faced for years. They have a very aggressive affordable housing program…which seems to have no end! The program started out modestly enough but by now has mushroomed. Part of the problem with their decades-old program is that residents are permitted to remain after retirement, creating the need for more and more housing. Moreover, it has become so large, it’s increasingly difficult to insure only qualified workers occupy the housing. In one case, it took years to remove one unqualified owner, including his legal action to the U. S. Supreme Court…which he lost.
It is a bit laughable that
Islander Martha’s VineyardIt is a bit laughable that some of the comments worry about development, when all of us know that land and houses are bought and sold constantly and there is little that the towns due to regulate, and what can they do? Meanwhile, commenters have a problem with 4 acres? For people who actually live and work here? That’s absurd.
Buying and selling existing
Mark EdgartownBuying and selling existing homes adds no incremental development and new projects must thankfully be reviewed by the MVC for their impact, not sure what you are getting at...
Housing for individuals, whom
Abby Normal The RockHousing for individuals, whom work in our towns, stores, and businesses is important. What is equally important is open/forest space. Putting people in a formerly heavily wooded area is destructive for a couple of reasons. The release of nitrogen when digging up the ground. The denuding of the land creates higher temperatures in that specific area. The loss of tree cover impacts ground cover and when it rains, erodes the land. Smart growth involves building in pre-existing dense areas with existing infrastructure. They should be walkable and transit friendly. A big proponent of housing for all, but, not all can live here. It is an island. There is a scarcity value because of that. It is not Singapore, an island about twice the size of MV but with close to six million people. Using that metric, are we going to have three million people?
Of course not all can live
Islander Martha’s VineyardOf course not all can live here, but the argument you were making about scarcity is an old argument that doesn’t hold water anymore. It might’ve five or 10 years ago, but if you’re talking about scarcity and living here, what you are really suggesting is that the only people that can and ought to live here are the ones who can afford $1 million houses. In fact, there wouldn’t be an island to live on without the services of those whose homes we are discussing. You can’t have it both ways, being for Affordable Housing, and also wanting the only kind of development and housing to be built for the wealthy. You have to offer solutions. It’s absurd.
Not sure you understood the
Abby Normal The RockNot sure you understood the use of the word scarcity. The island is only so big. Therefore, there is only some much land. That is what creates scarcity. For solutions, smart growth. In-fill lots, pre-existing dense locations, in town, not in virgin forest, but with pre-existing infrastructure and sewer and water connections.
We need affordable housing
Daniel ChilmarkWe need affordable housing desperately, and I'm glad this plan is going forward, the usual NIMBY opponents, mostly nostalgic for an island past from the moment they first rolled off the ferry, to the contrary
No one wants to get off the
mike SomewhereNo one wants to get off the boat to URBAN SPRAWL. Do you. Lets be intelligent and densify the towns, in town.
Calling the opposition to
JohannsCalling the opposition to clear cutting acres of forest nimby, is an attempt to keep people who care about housing AND the health of the environment from engaging. Tell me, what happens to town owned ‘open’ land once it’s developed? Does it go from being a non taxable asset to a taxable asset? Who benefits from this revenue stream? Why not repurpose existing structures around the island to create the much needed affordable housing for island families? Clear cutting may be easier and cheaper but It’s also short sighted and irresponsible.
Add new comment