A proposed zoning amendment to allow affordable housing projects on private roads in Tisbury with a special permit has split the town’s planning board.
A proposal to allow affordable housing projects on private roads in Tisbury with a special permit has split the town’s planning board, which held a public hearing Wednesday night to discuss potential changes to zoning bylaws.
“Currently the bylaw says that any multi-family housing has to be built on a public way, and in this change you can bring forward a project that is not on a public way but a private way for consideration for a special permit,” planning board chair Ben Robinson said.
Nearly three-fourths of the roads in Tisbury are private ways, Mr. Robinson said, so the bylaw change would open up more affordable housing opportunities in the town.
To qualify for a special permit application, 25 per cent of the units would need to be deed-restricted for affordable housing and another 25 per cent deed-restricted for community housing, according to the draft bylaw change posted on the planning board website.
“It is a special permit, so it’s not by right,” said Mr. Robinson.
The planning board would review applications for their impacts on neighboring homes, the environment and public services, among other considerations. Neighbors will also have their say in the special permit hearings, Mr. Robinson told a McLellan Way resident concerned about development on the private road off Carroll Way.
Board member Connie Alexander opposed the change, saying it would put an undue burden on property owners on private roads.
“These types of high intensity, dense projects need to be placed on public roads,” Ms. Alexander said.
If she is outvoted by other board members and the currently-proposed change is placed on the town meeting warrant, Ms. Alexander said she would publicly oppose it.
“I will write a letter to the editor against it,” she said. “I will be speaking on town meeting floor.”
Board member Casey Hayward also opposed the draft bylaw change as it stands, but both she and Ms. Alexander said they were willing to work on crafting a version they would support.
“We can do better,” Ms. Hayward said.
The planning board will tackle the bylaw again on March 1, along with a proposed change to the bylaw covering accessory apartments on undersized housing lots.
The board agreed to place four other proposed changes, including a ban on time shares and fractional ownerships in residential districts, on the April town meeting warrant.
Zoning bylaw changes require a two-thirds voter majority to pass.
Comments
Pondering this housing issue
D Hodsdon VHPondering this housing issue over and over. I believe that there is a shortage of types of housing. I also believe that VH has been taking on an undo burden of housing of these developments be it apartments or housing clustering.
Yes VH has the boat, transportation and a closeness to groceries and a pharmacy but so does WT. Why is it that VH and OB has taken on this burden?
Tisbury has limited land availability that does not effect bodies of water all be it Tashmoo, the harbor or the lagoon. Does the burden have to be placed in our hands?
Time for us to think about the whole.
As well where does sustainability come in to play? The island is a finite, we have to think seriously about the future and I don't mean next week, next month or next year.
Thank you my friend. How is
George Stein OBThank you my friend. How is the complex on Beach Rd in VH ignored ? Federal and state approved already. Each town in Dukes county should use that as a model. Each town should have facilities on the drawing board already. As Elmer Fudd would say “ be very very quiet “
Every piece of land that gets
Vasha Vineyard HavenEvery piece of land that gets cleared for housing, no matter for whom, destroys habitat for mane species, some we don't even ever notice. Ask the non humans about their housing crisis.
"Every piece of land that
Cillian Byrne Oak Bluffs"Every piece of land that gets cleared for housing, no matter for whom, destroys habitat for mane species, some we don't even ever notice" To clarify this statement, you oppose the construction of further housing for humans that we know exist because doing so will alter/destroy the habitat of species that may exist?
You want to allow more room for all of the other species on the planet to reside? Start voting for leaders who advocate for increased housing density instead of NIMBY policies. In the long term, increased housing density would encourage a re-wilding of areas "outside" of the main streets. This post-WW2 experiment in sprawling, single-family housing - with our unnaturally green lawns, residential cul-de-sacs, and white picket fences - is the exception to the norm of how humans have organized our habitats for millennia.
Make that your single-issue voting platform, and refuse to vote for any politician who won't take a stand on it, and you might have a win-win on your hands.
Adding density where density
Abby Normal The RockAdding density where density exists is smart growth. You want existing infrastructure, preferable is an in-fill lot, walkable, and transit friendly.
The island loves Special Permits. They are more a tool to prevent then help. If you can meet set backs, it should be "as of right". Large green lawns are one of the most wasteful things we do as an island. They require too much water and are not particularly good for the earth.
But, we do need housing, and as Mr. Hodson pointed out, it is an island, so that land is finite. And, believe it or not, not everyone that wants to live here can. That is life. I want a penthouse overlooking Central Park. Should someone make it affordable for me?
People come here for the rural nature, they are not looking for Singapore and millions of people.
It is a delicate balance between people and nature. But, if we kill off nature, we kill ourselves.
Add new comment