The Martha’s Vineyard Commission decided Thursday not to review a demolition on Hatch Road in Vineyard Haven, amid wide-ranging discussion about tear-downs.
The Martha’s Vineyard Commission decided Thursday not to review a demolition on Hatch Road in Vineyard Haven, but first there was more wide-ranging discussion about the role of the commission in reviewing tear-downs — and beyond.
“It’s an interesting heads up about where we are now,” commissioner Kathy Newman said at the meeting Thursday night. “I keep thinking about character, and maybe we have to rethink what we mean by historical sigificance.”
Demolition projects are on the rise. Last week an MVC subcommittee began reviewing the demolition of a home on Wing Road in Oak Bluffs that dated to 1900 and was torn down without required prior review. The project is intended to make way for an elderly housing project.
Slide shows dates of houses in neighborhood, with 22 Hatch Road highlighted.
Slide shows dates of houses in neighborhood, with 22 Hatch Road highlighted.
On Monday the same subcommittee will begin a post-public hearing review of a historic house on Indian Hill Road in West Tisbury that the owners want to demolish.
On Thursday night the commission took up the project at 22 Hatch Road in Vineyard Haven. Property owners David and Lisa Grain plan to demolish the roughly 7,000-square foot house and build a roughly 13,000-square-foot, five-bedroom house, according to commission documents. The Grains also own a large waterfront property next door which was extensively renovated in 2013. They bought 22 Hatch Road in 2020 for $2.4 million, land records show.
The house dates originally to 1900 but has been extensively remodeled several times over the years. It does not lie in the town historic district. The Tisbury historic district commission has recommended allowing the demolition, advising that the materials be salvaged for use by Habitat for Humanity or other affordable housing groups.
Jeffrey Dubard, a West Tisbury resident who attended the meeting, said he plans to relocate the buildings for use as affordable housing elsewhere, although no written agreements with the property owners were submitted to the commission as part of the application.
As commissioners debated whether to review the demolition project, many factors weighed on them.
A slide prepared by MVC staff showed that the majority of the houses in the neighborhood date to around 1900.
“This is situated in a mature neigborhood,” said commissioner Ben Robinson, who argued in favor of review. “Since we don’t know what’s going to replace it . . . I think it’s incumbent on us to see what’s going to replace this,” he continued. “We need to take seriously a house that’s been there for over 100 years. We really don’t understand how they are going to salvage it either . . . It’s loose enough, so if they don’t figure it out they don’t have to do it. We’re not doing our job in protecting a mature neighborhood if we don’t see what is going to replace it.”
Commissioner Brian Smith disagreed.
“It does not resemble a house built in 1900,” he said. “Whether we consider what happens in the future would be relevant if the historic commission said it was historic — then we would need to consider that. But without that definition, no one is saying it looks like a historic property.”
Commissioner Christine Todd said Nantucket had begun to address the issue of what she said is termed “creeping reconstruction,” and said she believed review was warranted.
“I think there is history in this property. I think the neighborhood has to be considered . . . I’m not really keen on just saying, go ahead and tear it down.”
Commissioner Jeff Agnoli raised concern about the environmental impacts of tear-downs. Commisisoner Jay Grande say he too was concerned about neighborhood preservation, but thought the historic district commission recommendation should hold sway.
Commissioner Michael Kim suggested the commission ask the town to document the parts of the house that are historic. “It seems to be a minimum requirement to keep the history of this building whether it is still standing or not,” he said.
But commissioner Doug Sederholm said without review, the MVC cannot attach conditions to the project.
Mr. Sederholm said for him the historic commission recommendation was a strong deciding factor, but he commented too on the painful nature of seeing “a perfectly lovely house” be torn down. “But for the applicant’s desire to have something else there, one would never knock it down,” Mr. Sederholm said.
In the end the vote was 10-5 to not review the project. The roll call vote follows.
Voting to not review: Trip Barnes, Jay Grande, Joan Malkin, Linda Sibley, Doug Sederholm, Michael Kim, Jim Vercruysse, Fred Hancock, Brian Smith and Ernie Thomas.
Voting in favor of review: Jeff Agnoli, Jay Grossman, Kathy Newman, Ben Robinson and Christine Todd.
Comments
Remember the names of those
Jason R. EdgRemember the names of those who voted to not review and do everything in your power and beyond to keep them from being a part of the MVC. This organization is meant to protect the vineyard and allowing a 13000 square foot residence to pave over an already substantial home is utter madness. The environment and the vineyard cannot take this anymore.
Jason, please provide factual
David Straw EdgartoenJason, please provide factual evidence on how replacing a property with a more environmentally efficient home has a negative impact on the environment. Also land owners have the right to do as they please on their property, the MVC has been and continues to over reach their authority. It’s time to disband the MVC once and for all.
environmentally efficient!
august west edgartownenvironmentally efficient!
Not true, David. I think the
Islander MVNot true, David. I think the “freedom“ people who constantly insist that we all have a right to do anything we want, they always take away from the fact that, say I wanted to put a gun range there or a restaurant - as much as you people always want to yelp you can do anything on private land - it’s a lie. This is America and there are laws. You have to wear a seat belt, too. It’s not up to you.
The project to replace the
Pay Attention VHThe project to replace the existing structure was not on the MVC's agenda. The hearing was in regard to this building being historic or not. If the house that is going to replace it triggers a referral to the MCV then that's when it would be addressed by them.
The Grains got lucky now they
Bob EdgartownThe Grains got lucky now they will not be told how to build there dream home by the MVC. When building a dream home it is always better to have it as your dream and not the dream of this group.
How does the Island, and the
Vasha Vineyard HavenHow does the Island, and the environment in general, benefit by this demolition?
That is too nice of a house
Ken Edg.That is too nice of a house to demo. I hope someone can move it. Even if you have to make it four sections it would be worth it. Id trade my house for that anyday.
Having been a resident in VH
Miriam Anderson Not on islandHaving been a resident in VH since childhood, I agree this beautiful house is worth saving. If it could possibly be moved and saved, I hope someone will do it.
13,000 square feet. OMG.
Schools Out Vineyard Haven13,000 square feet. OMG. Imagine that heating and cooling bill.
Not sure what the limit for
JT MVNot sure what the limit for square footage on a new house on MV should be, but I do know it should be WAYYYYYY less than 13,000. I personally design super high-end residential, and I'm sorry but that number is obscene.
This proposed 13,000 sq ft
Amy EdgartownThis proposed 13,000 sq ft “home”, will abut one of the owners other MV “homes”, which is just shy of 10,000 Sq ft. That property, too, was originally a historic home that was razed and rebuilt by this owner at nearly double its original size. So to put this in perspective, this would be similar to the Edgartown Library sitting next door to the MV Museum. And why is there a question about IF this would change the character of the neighborhood? It’s turning into the Hampton’s around here…
This past summer I spent 7
NCS Off islandThis past summer I spent 7 glorious weeks on the island after a 7 year hiatus.
I can not stress enough how much the character and flavor of this wonderful place has changed.
I used to summer in the Hamptons for years and saw the same change there that is happening here.
The tearing down of old homes and the building of new ones that are doubled in size changes the character of a place.
The vineyard has always had an incredible charm. And I’m not opposed to new constructions, but what is happening in Edgartown for instance is appalling. It is getting unrecognizable! It’s looking like a small South Hampton. And if that’s what your looking forward, then just go there and leave the charming Vineyard to the people who love it as it is.
Whether it is historic or not
Frank Brunelle Vineyard HavenWhether it is historic or not is one consideration. Whatever the MVC does or does not do with it in that regard is of a minor consequence compared to the amount of Co2 that this will generate. First there is the tearing down, then the building of approximately double the size of 7,000 sq. ft. which is enormous by any standard, and then there is the increase of fossil fuel to heat, cool and entertain the inhabitants. What should be done by the MVC as a consequence of this request is to at the very least perform an analysis of the increase of Co2 as a result of their decision. In fact, all of the approvals of tear downs and increases in size and Co2 should, by the MVC's own commitment to a target of Net Zero at some date in the future, should be tabulated and recorded. That being said, I offer congratulations to the home owners for getting a pass by our confused and weak MVC and wish them all the best since anyone with the means to do so, would, as it is a part of our human nature to better our lives. They are to be congratulated, our MVC, held to account.
While personally I think 13K
John Aldeborgh KatamaWhile personally I think 13K sq. ft. is a little crazy for a summer cottage, I don’t really think it’s my business what the owners do with their property. As for Co2 generation, a well built modern 13K building could easily be more environmentally friendly than a 7K building from a century ago. Next, the cost, complexity and likely Co2 generation of a major remodeling could easily equal a tear down and new build. Also, Co2 generation by any of us is hardly limited by our home(s) and the idea of putting a Co2 limit on individuals is inconsistent with a free society.
Those concerned we’re becoming the Hampton’s need not worry, we already are, just a slightly different variant. These are powerful and influential folks and it’s not the role of the MVC to crusade against them. As long as the very wealthy flock to the island they will continue to invest in keeping it up to their very high standards standards. It has helped make the Vineyard what it is today, but it is a double edged sword.
Hmmm. 13,000 sq ft is a very
gina Menemsha/NYCHmmm. 13,000 sq ft is a very large scale house even for that area. @ the very least maybe the owners can work with Habitat for Humanity & salvage as many reusable materials possible .. Perhaps the MVC could add that step as a requirement & not just a pure demolish ..
Agree- if nothing else- let’s
West TisAgree- if nothing else- let’s reuse the materials from all of these tear downs! Building materials are In short supply- don’t let these houses end up in a landfill. Make reuse a requirement! Why it’s not already, I have no idea…
I am so sad to see this being
Fred4peace VHI am so sad to see this being torn down. I considered buying but was not yet ready. I really wish I had pushed to get this. MVC needs to better define historic to capture homes from the early 1900’s. Otherwise they will simply put their fingers to the wind and risk being unfair to other homeowners. The new home review should surely include environmental impact.
I think it is a very sad day
julie robinson West TisburyI think it is a very sad day FOR THE VINEYARD when all our heritage is being lost by tearing down our houses because people want bigger houses for a few months a year. I agree that we need some new blood on the commission to protect our island. Thank you to those on the MVC who voted to further the discussion. The islands future depends on it.
This proposed new
Abbe Burt Vineyard HavenThis proposed new construction of a 13,000 square-foot house is a massive blot on the culture and character and history of Vineyard Haven and the Vineyard. Where is the Vineyard Haven planning board on proposing a zoning by law limiting how size - And joining West Tisbury and Chilmark and to halt construction of these mega-mansions that are totally out of scale with Vineyard living? Residential building size limits are overdue. We need to halt the consequences from the need of some people to physically display their wealth. Houses built larger than the need of the family living in it are certainly counter to the history of people of Martha’s Vineyard. Please let’s stop this mega house building especially at the expense of existing structures and the erosion of historic Vineyard values. My heart is hurting.
Ten thousand square feet PLUS
Geraldine Brooks West TisburyTen thousand square feet PLUS 13,000 sqare feet. And every light in the existing mansion blazing, every night. If good people choose to live this way, it’s hard to be hopeful for the island, or anyplace else.
The very things that make MV
JG OBThe very things that make MV special are being lost at an increasingly faster pace. Soon MV will look like the East end of LI. If that is what you are looking for, why not move there instead of tearing down a perfectly good 7,000 sq ft house and building a 13,000 sq ft monster house? It is obscene. And by the time the proponents of “their land, let them do what they want”, realize what has happened, the MV that most love, will be gone. I am alarmed by the number of tear downs that have been allowed in the last year, and the MVC doesn’t seem to grasp the consequences of their poor decisions.
It is starting to look like
Katherine Scott TisburyIt is starting to look like the MVC is the wrong locus for this issue (and others). @@
The MVC is supposed to be an all-Island planning body. @@
It is supposed to have some foresight, and not always be reacting to individual cases.@@
Where is the policymaking? Is any going on there? @@
This kind of excess in an era where we are all staring at very serious energy crunches is appalling. @@
Really kind of insane. @@
What kind of values are these? @@
As for environmentally retrogressive, get with contemporary thinking. @@
Tearing down a house means that all of the energy embodied in the work and materials it took to build and maintain the current house---in all of their phases and supply lines---are wasted. There are people who know how to calculate this figure. @@
The "Legal Notices" section
Amy EdgartownThe "Legal Notices" section in each edition of this paper, showcase the many appeals, special permits, notices of intent etc. for many shocking proposals that are approved more often than not. The amount of swimming pools approved in Edgartown alone in the last 24 months, many in areas that clearly fall under the Edgartown Wetlands Protection Bylaw, is astonishing. Sure, throw in a new deep water dock too. Who cares about ruining the local shellfish supply anyway- I'll just have some flown in from afar...
Just because "you can" doesn't mean "you should". If these local committees will not protect the islands best interests what can be done?
Add new comment