Island Plan: Draft for Public Comment

Introduction 1.0: Introduction

2009-07-28T14:58:00.002-04:00

A combination of isolation and strong actions by the local community has kept the Island of Martha's Vineyard as a very special and distinct place in the world. But significant additional effort will be needed to ensure that excessive or poorly managed growth don’t undermine the very qualities that make people want to live or visit here, and slowly destroy the Island that we love.

Insulated by four miles of ocean, Martha's Vineyard was until the mid-20th century a community with its own manner of doing things. It was largely independent and self-reliant, with an economy based largely on fishing, farming, and increasingly on tourism. Most people lived in villages where they could walk to school, the post office, and shops. People supported each other in tough times. They could walk freely in the countryside, in woods, fields, and on beaches most likely owned by relatives or friends. Change was slow; new residents and buildings fit into the existing community without causing disruption. It was in many ways the model of what we would now call “sustainable development” or “smart growth”.

Even today, visitors are amazed to find a place where the environment and lifestyle has been touched more lightly by modern life than most of America. Though the Island has changed in the past generation, strong and conscious community action has done a much better job of maintaining the Island’s distinct, high quality physical and social identity and character than most other places. We retain from the past many characteristics that other communities are now striving to create. Community life is still largely centered on main streets and rural general stores rather than suburban shopping malls. People know and take care of their neighbors. A drive out of town means passing through woods and fields along curving, tree-canopied, two-lane roads rather than through strip malls.

In many ways, we are so far behind that we are way out ahead.

However, in other ways, the Vineyard has gone off course. Ironically, the Vineyard’s success in preserving its natural beauty and its small-town, New England charm has attracted unprecedented growth and prosperity that undermines those very features. As the quality of the environment in much of the rest of America has deteriorated, the Vineyard has become an ever more rare and attractive tourist destination and place for seasonal homes. The result has been massive growth, far outpacing all other regions in Massachusetts except Nantucket.

While we have successfully managed this development to a large extent, we are not immune to what is happening on the mainland. Our economy and our way of living are increasingly part of national systems; we are almost completely dependent on imports of food, energy, and manufactured goods. The costs of housing and living are soaring faster than off-Island. Rapid growth, channeled by off-Island-style zoning regulations, has led to a form of suburban sprawl, to pollution of coastal ponds, and to fragmentation and destruction of vast swaths of globally rare habitat.

These changes are making the Island more and more like everywhere else.

Our economy is directly or indirectly based almost exclusively on keeping the Vineyard as an attractive place to live or visit. But there is concern that we are allowing the Vineyard to be increasingly and negatively transformed, and that this will undermine our visitor-based economy and all our livelihoods.

Introduction 1.1: Successes

2009-07-28T14:57:00.001-04:00

The Island has many strengths worth recognizing and holding onto.

· The Vineyard has maintained a strong sense of community, where people will pitch in to help a family facing sickness or fire, or to build an Agricultural Hall.

· The Vineyard has in many ways managed to keep the Island’s rural character and a considerable amount of open space.

· The Vineyard has preserved the distinct character of each town, from the unique streetscape of each main street to the different way each town government works.

· The Vineyard has retained mostly small, locally-owned businesses and banks, with no big-box stores and almost no chain stores.

· The Vineyard still has farming and fishing which provide local, fresh food, and contribute to the Vineyard’s character.

· The Vineyard remains a diverse community with year-round and seasonal residents, with a large range of income levels, and with a variety of ethnic groups.

· The Vineyard has very good municipal services – schools, police, fire, EMT, libraries – as well as very good hospital and medical/community services.

·The Vineyard Transit Authority carries a million passengers a year. If you think traffic is bad now, imagine if all those trips were being made by car.

· The Vineyard has significant wealth – property values of over $18 billion and an “annual gross domestic product” of over $800 million – which makes many good things possible (though it is not without its negative impacts as discussed in the next section). Our good services are thanks in large part to the financial support of seasonal residents who pay a considerable portion of town taxes and are generous contributors to Island non-profits.

Introduction 1.2: Challenges

2009-07-28T14:56:00.002-04:00

Martha's Vineyard is a wonderful place, but it is on a course that will lead to deterioration of many of the features we treasure most, unless we act. This section outlines the key challenges that the Vineyard today, or will face in the future as a result of continuing trends and off-Island forces. Many are related to continued development and changing population.

The remainder of the Island Plan will describe how we can deal effectively with these challenges, by working together on a clear new course of action.

Challenge 1: Growth is unsustainable. Over the past forty years, the Vineyard has faced massive growth, with the population increasing from 6,034 in 1970 to about 15,444 today. Though we’ve managed this growth better than most places, it has significantly changed the Island and our way of life. However, this amount of development cannot be sustained, because this growth is the fundamental cause of many of our other challenges listed below, such as traffic congestion and pollution in ponds. Also, since the Island is of limited size, we have to face the fact that we simply cannot grow indefinitely.

Challenge 2: Character and scenic values are deteriorating.

The Island’s visual character – a combination of scenic roads, exquisitely beautiful natural areas, and small town New England architecture – is both at the core of our sense of ourselves and is key to attracting visitors. The addition of many small changes – a large new house here, a roadside stockade fence there –continue to undermine this character.

Challenge 3: Suburban sprawl is consuming the countryside.

Development is taking large amounts of land, fragmenting habitat, and increasingly forcing residents to drive to get to work, store, or school. Commercial development on the outskirts of town – notably Upper State Road in Tisbury, Upper Main Street in Edgartown, and the West Tisbury Business District – has allowed for larger-scale businesses without destroying historic downtowns. Yet these are essentially car-oriented, commercial strips that are both poor environments for pedestrians and undermine the Vineyard’s character. Downtowns are increasingly being turned over to seasonal shops, empty in winter.

Challenge 4: It is getting harder to get around.

Traffic jams at key intersections are already problematic in the summertime. However, since we have reached the capacity of much of our road network, future growth threatens to lead to serious gridlock for much of the year. We have successfully avoided widening roads (other than the widening of the Edgartown-Vineyard-Haven and Edgartown-West-Tisbury Roads in the 70’s) or putting in traffic lights that would undermine the Island’s character, though increased traffic will increase pressure to make these kinds of road “improvements”. Growth in the bus system is constrained by financial limitations. We have 37 miles of off-road bike paths, but there are many gaps at critical places in the network and on-road bicycle accommodation is deficient in many locations.

Challenge 5: Public access is limited.

Property owners are increasingly resistant to allowing public access to private lands, ending the traditional informal access to land and beaches. This is turning us into an island where we cannot get to the water, though public control of some large beaches, such as State and South Beaches, has been secured.

Challenge 6: Zoning is outdated.

In an attempt to deal with increased development in the early 1970s, towns adopted zoning regulations using standard zoning formulas from off-Island (e.g. large single-use areas with uniform lot sizes and setbacks). In retrospect, much of our zoning has many important flaws, forcing development to sprawl into rural areas and prohibiting traditional settlement patterns by banning small lot sizes in town while allowing new buildings that are out of scale with their neighborhood.

Environment

Challenge 7: Wastewater is polluting coastal ponds.

Nitrogen pollution, largely the result of wastewater coming from septic systems, is already polluting many of our coastal ponds. We have not yet seen the full effects from the existing buildings, let alone from future growth. This undermines our commercial and recreational fishing industries, limits recreational uses of ponds, deteriorates the quality of the environment, and undermines property values. We also need to deal with other sources of excess nitrogen, such as landscaping.

Challenge 8: Climate change will modify our climate, coastline, and habitats.

It is now clear that the Earth has entered a period of considerable climate change. For the Vineyard, we will see a greater frequency of hurricanes and major storms, and sea level rise will threaten low-lying areas, such as the Vineyard Haven waterfront and much of downtown Edgartown. We are projected to have a generally warmer climate that will translate into changing plant and animal species. Our warmer, dryer summers will likely lead to lower water levels in non-tidal ponds, further concentrating nitrogen pollution.

Challenge 9: Energy will be more expensive and scarce.

A growing shortage of oil and concerns about carbon emissions will make fossil fuel-based energy much more expensive in the future. For the Vineyard, this will mean the cost of imported food and other products will go up (making local food and products more competitive.) We are especially vulnerable to rising energy costs, since the Vineyard is inherently energy-inefficient, mainly because our detached, single-family houses are hard to heat and our spread-out settlement makes us car dependent. On the other hand, we have great potential for generating renewable energy, especially through wind resources.

Challenge 10: Globally rare habitat is being fragmented or destroyed.

Over half the Vineyard is habitat for rare and endangered species. While there are somewhat better controls than in previous decades, development and landscaping practices continue to fragment this habitat with buildings and roads or the replacement of native vegetation with large manicured lawns that have little ecological value.

Challenge 11: We’re wasting our waste.

Every year, we ship 40,000 tons of solid waste off-Island. We have basic recycling, but no community composting as is done in Nantucket. We are not equipped to reuse building materials. The fact that we are a small community makes it more difficult to set up sophisticated ways of dealing with solid waste. This is exacerbated by the fact that the Island’s towns are split into two waste management districts, though there have been recent discussions about recombining them.

Economy

Challenge 12: The economy is “leaking” off-Island.

A considerable portion of our spending, estimated at two thirds of expenditures by year-round residents, is off-Island, meaning these funds are not available to support local businesses and jobs. We import almost all our needs: food, energy, and manufactured goods. A high proportion of our businesses are small and locally owned, but this is threatened from off-Island competition through the Internet, off-Island big-box stores, and the arrival of chain stores on-Island. Recent programs to “buy local” and promote “Island grown” indicate new interest in dealing with this.

Challenge 13: There is a lack of economic diversity.

We have a visitor-based economy (it has been said that our main export is happy visitors). Almost all activity is directly or indirectly related to servicing seasonal residents and visitors through shops and restaurants, real estate, construction, and landscaping. Many of these are service jobs at the low end of the pay spectrum, though wages are somewhat better than off-Island (although this is often offset by the high cost of living.) For the Vineyard, being so dependent on one cluster of industries means our economy is less resilient to economic ups and downs. The fact that this cluster is so seasonal makes it difficult for our non-seasonal businesses to remain viable. Compared to the rest of the Commonwealth, we have relatively few jobs in the most high-paying or fast-growing fields: professional, technical, health, or education.

Challenge 14: Fishing and farming are threatened.

These traditional industries, once central to our economy and lifestyle, have seriously declined. In the 19^th century, most of the Island was farmland. Now there are only about 1,000 acres left, only a third of which is permanently protected. This translates into a loss of jobs and availability of local foods. It also undermines the rural character of the Island represented, in part, by the presence of farms along roadsides, the Farmers Market and the Ag Fair. Similarly, fishing has substantially declined. Menemsha is the last vestige of a fishing industry once central to the Vineyard’s economy and community.

Community

Challenge 15: There is a shortage of affordable, year-round housing.

The attractiveness of the Vineyard to wealthy seasonal residents has driven up the cost of housing dramatically in recent years. In the past decade, the median home price has more than tripled to $650,000 (in 2008), which is considered affordable to an individual or family earning $132,000 a year, about three times the Island’s median household income of $57,355. Ninety one percent of dwellings are owner-occupied, detached, single-family homes, creating a shortage of rental housing and of multi-unit housing to serve other needs such as younger people starting out and older people who no longer want to maintain a home. The Island's year-round housing issues are now engaged by an array of organizations acting in collaboration with each other and all six Towns to offer increased rental and ownership opportunities to Island residents. However much more must be done to maintain a viable, year-round community.

Challenge 16: The cost of living is very high.

Due mainly to the high cost of housing, the overall cost of living is approximately 57% higher than the national average and 12% higher than Boston. This is partly due to higher transportation costs, and the higher cost of doing business here because of the seasonal economy and the high cost of labor.

Challenge 17: There is a widening gap between groups.

The Vineyard has a diverse population, but there is concern that we are increasingly becoming a collection of separate communities based on income, seasonality, and ethnicity. Seasonal residents are a vital part of the community. Many take an active role in Vineyard life, supporting local businesses and non-profits and financially supporting the Island by paying a very large portion of property taxes (though they make fewer demands on services, especially schools, and have no vote). Most seasonal owners and even short-term visitors have a long-lasting relation to Vineyard. Many have been coming for years and feel they are Islanders. Yet, although our community is largely defined by the relation between the seasonal and year-round community, there is a sense of a widening gap between them. Additionally, there are new pressures from a recent influx of a large immigrant, mostly Brazilian population, now estimated at 20% of the year-round population and including a large number of undocumented immigrants. While this new population provides vital services on the Vineyard and adds to our cultural diversity, many of the immigrants have limited communication and involvement with the rest of community.

Challenge 18: The population is aging, and there is a loss of young families.

The Vineyard’s population is already considerably older than the average for the Commonwealth and is projected to get much older as Island baby-boomers reach their retirement years and seasonal residents move here to retire. The number of people over the age of 70 could more than triple in the next ten years, greatly increasing the need for health and human services. On the other hand, we have a somewhat smaller proportion of young people. The Vineyard is a great place to raise a family, but many young people are finding there is not enough reason to remain or return here, given limited job opportunities and the high cost of housing and living.

Introduction 1.3: Goals

2009-07-28T14:53:00.002-04:00

COMPREHENSIVE GOAL

Make Martha's Vineyard a more sustainable, resilient, diverse, balanced, and self-sufficient community, preserving the Island’s unique natural, rural, and historical character and creating a better future for Vineyarders and the Island itself. Use the Island and manage its development in ways that are compatible with the long-term sustainability and carrying capacities of our natural resources and community.

Overall Goals

1. Conserve enough of the Vineyard’s distinct ecological regions to retain their biodiversity, to protect the Island’s scenic character, and to support recreational uses.

2. Restore the ecological vibrancy of salt ponds and bays with healthy expanses of eelgrass, sustainable shellfish populations, and varied recreational opportunities.

3. Maintain a community that is economically, culturally, and ethnically diverse, remaining intimately connected to the traditional ways of the Vineyard.

4. Protect the distinct and diverse character of the Island’s six towns, while forging a stronger regional perspective for dealing with Island-wide issues.

5. Stimulate a vital, balanced, local economy that is more self-reliant and more diverse.

6. Produce as much of our essentials, such as food and energy, as we can, and convert our waste into useful products.

7. Sustain our year-round community by addressing housing affordability and the high cost of living.

8. Direct development to town and village areas and limit building in environmentally sensitive areas.

9. Reinforce compact, mixed-use, walkable town and village centers.

10. Ensure that new building is compatible in its scale, siting, and design with its surroundings.

The rest of the Island Plan outlines more specific objectives in each of nine topic areas, as well as 201 specific strategies for achieving them.

Though at first glance it may seem that some of these goals, objectives, and strategies may be in conflict, for the most part they are mutually reinforcing. Achieving greater diversity and balance will make a stronger, more resilient community, economy, and natural environment, better able to withstand whatever surprises come our way, from a global financial crisis to global warming. Resolving apparent conflicts often comes down to making sure we do the right thing in the right place. Protecting more environmentally significant land as open space doesn’t conflict with affordable housing, because that is not where these projects should be built.

An important and exciting principle underlying the Island Plan is that we can not only ensure that future development better responds to community needs, but we can repair many errors of the past, such as by bringing polluted coastal ponds back to health, by restoring fragmented habitat, and by reestablishing scenic beauty.

Introduction 1.4: Summary of Recommendations

2009-07-28T14:50:00.004-04:00

Development & Growth

Current zoning, available land, and growth trends could create a very different Vineyard from the one we know today, and from what people say they want. We should manage future development and growth differently, in order to preserve the Martha's Vineyard that we all treasure.

Based on available land and current zoning, this trend of spreading out development will accelerate in the future, with almost half of new development scattered across the countryside, compared to a quarter before 1970 and a third from 1970 to 2005.

The Island Plan prepared three scenarios outlining a range of possibilities for future growth, with varying amounts and locations of development.

§ Present Trends – buildout based on present zoning on available land (78% more houses),

§ Modest Growth – based on a reduction in development, especially in environmentally sensitive areas (30% more houses), and

§ No Net Growth – with very little additional development, offset by “undevelopment” in other areas (0% more houses).

Comparing the impacts of these scenarios illustrates why continuing the trends of the past thirty years is not sustainable or desirable. Developing all available land as presently permitted under existing zoning would result in excessive growth that would undermine those characteristics of Martha's Vineyard that residents and visitors treasure the most.

Preparation of the Island Plan involved extensive analysis and detailed mapping of the Island according to a variety of interrelated criteria (natural environment, water resources, built environment, hazard mitigation, housing suitability, and economic development suitability) to produce a Land Use Guidance Map.

 KEY PROPOSALS

Preserve and reinforce the traditional settlement pattern of the Island.

This includes avoiding new areas of commercial development, new town centers or large, dense neighborhoods in other parts of the Island. We should also improve and restore problematic recent development by restoring destroyed or fragmented habitat and by transforming the newer car-oriented, single-use commercial areas into mixed-use, pedestrian-oriented areas better linked to the historic town centers.

Reduce the amount of future development, especially in environmentally sensitive areas.

Achieving this objective for the whole Island or for specific areas will involve using a combination of techniques dealing directly with density, such as adopting the Vineyard Land Use Guidance Map; changing minimum lot sizes; revising subdivision regulations; increasing tax incentives for land preservation, changing the rate of open space acquisition; extending infrastructure in growth areas while limiting infrastructure connections in conservation areas; setting up redevelopment programs for “opportunity areas” and considering setting up a system of Transfer of Development Rights. In addition, many of the other strategies throughout the Island Plan will also result in less overall new development.

Reduce the rate of development.

We should implement “rate of growth” regulations for several reasons. It would keep a steady rate of construction work without debilitating peaks or valleys. It would lead to more open space preservation by giving the community more time to acquire land before it is all developed. It could improve the quality of development projects by giving priority within an annual quota to desirable projects, such as affordable housing or locations served by town infrastructure. It would give the community time to absorb and adjust to the impacts of development and, if necessary, to modify growth management policies to deal with problems as they emerge.

Ensure that development and redevelopment projects are better planned and designed.

Other sections of the Island Plan discuss a variety of tools for improving projects, such as by better protecting environmentally significant areas, increasing housing affordability, respecting community character, and minimizing visual impact in significant viewsheds and vistas. In general, these involve requiring: review for projects that might be more problematic or are in sensitive locations while streamlining desirable projects; providing density incentives for desirable development; and setting up a system of mitigation fees to reduce and offset a project’s impacts.

Built Environment

Martha’s Vineyard’s unique, coherent, high-quality built environment is threatened by demolition of significant older buildings, construction of new buildings that are too big, don’t fit their surroundings, and/or are not environmentally sound.

Martha's Vineyard’s beautiful, historic, and cohesive built environment is among the most remarkable in the country and is an important part of the scenic beauty at the heart of the Island’s character, identity, and visitor-based economy. We need to preserve this distinct character and promote environmentally sound building. This includes ensuring that each neighborhood and streetscape is reinforced, not undermined, by new development. It also means strengthening our dynamic, historic downtowns, and modifying our newer commercial areas with preservation and careful infill.

A TARGET

ENsure that new buildings fit their context by tailoring zoning to reflect each neighborhood’s characteristics and by extending design review to all historic areas and traditional neighborhoods.

SOME KEY PROPOSALS

Protect historic resources and ensure that new development is compatible.

This includes culturally significant buildings, streetscapes, and areas. We should enlarge historic districts to protect all historic areas and traditional neighborhoods and revise zoning in historic areas and traditional neighborhoods to conform to historic patterns.

Protect community character by ensuring that buildings fit into their context.

This is especially important along roads and public waters. It should be done in a way that also allows for some creativity and flexibility. We should:

§   set up project review processes along Scenic Roads and Public Waters Viewsheds, and for high-impact buildings based on size or other criteria;

§   revise zoning requirements in neighborhoods to conform to existing character, and

§   set up municipal tree-planting programs.

Promote environmentally sound building.

We should implement “green-building” techniques:

§   Setting energy/green-building standards for new construction and major renovations,

§   Establishing a program to encourage energy/green-building standards for existing buildings, and

§   Ensuring that renewable energy facilities are compatible with historic and community character.

We should also minimize the general ongoing environmental impacts of building usage on its surroundings, by:

§   Requiring dark sky compliant lighting,

§   Limiting use of toxins and nuisances, and

§   Setting up new procedures to oversee the construction process.

Redevelop “opportunity areas”.

These are areas identified in the Plan where substantial change is anticipated that could positively transform their character (e.g. Upper State Road). The aim is to improve the quality of the physical environment, make them work more efficiently, and incorporate compact mixed-use. We should prepare an urban design plan for each area, modify zoning as required, make public improvements, and encourage private development.

Energy and Waste

Rising fuel costs and increasing environ-mental concerns make us more aware of the high costs and unsustain-ability of bringing virtually all our energy to the Island and transporting away virtually all our waste. Energy and waste offer huge potential to establish sustainable practices that will also generate local employment. The goal is to ensure the Vineyard community has reliable, secure, ample, and affordable energy supplies to meet its needs, obtains as much energy as possible from renewable sources, and transforms a maximum amount of our waste into useful resources.

A TARGET

CUT PROJECTED ENERGY USE BY HALF USING EFFICIENCY MEASURES FOR BUILDINGS AND TRANSPORTATION, AND PRODUCE OR OFFSET THE REST, MAINLY FROM COMMUNITY-OWNED, OFF-SHORE WIND TURBINES. (E.G. ABOUT FIFTY, 500’-HIGH TURBINES).

SOME KEY PROPOSALS

Reduce energy used in buildings.

Buildings are the main source of energy consumption on the Island, using 30% for heating/cooling and 33% for electricity. Energy efficiency measures could reduce our usage by at least half. We should:

§   Adopt standards in our building codes requiring greater energy efficiency in new construction,

§   Institute energy audits and upgrades for commercial buildings and when homes are sold (supported through a revolving fund), and

§   Implement energy pricing structures that encourage energy efficiency.

Pursue local generation of renewable energy at both utility and small scales.

The Vineyard’s wind energy potential is among the best on the East Coast. The most efficient way we can harness this energy is with large, utility-scale wind facilities. We should:

§   Develop a legal structure to allow for private investment in local energy generation facilities,

§   Establish an electrical cooperative or Island utility company, and designate the best sites for clustering wind turbines, whether offshore or land-based.

At the small scale, we should:

§   Ensure that new dwellings are sited and designed to incorporate renewable sources now or in the future, and

§   Develop information and incentive programs for property owners to encourage on-site energy generation.

Reverse the growth in motor vehicle miles traveled and reduce the related amount of gasoline used.

Transportation accounts for a third of our energy use. This can be reduced by promoting transit, bicycle, walking, and encouraging people to drive less (see Transportation). Promoting the use of energy-efficient vehicles for cars and transit vehicles would further reduce our carbon emissions.

Generate less waste materials and convert most waste into useful resources with an integrated, Island-wide program of waste management.

§   The first step in dealing with solid waste is to generate less. We should provide ways to reuse or re-purpose materials - including minimizing the demolition of homes - and make recycling easier.

§   We should also develop a coordinated Island-wide waste management system to implement better waste treatment techniques such as an Island-wide composting facility to compost sewage sludge, construction debris and other organic wastes.

Housing

In the past decade, the cost of housing has soared to such levels that many year-round residents and seasonal workers are unable to find adequate housing. Businesses have increasing difficulty retaining the workforce they need. To maintain a healthy and economically diverse community, we need to continue to provide a full range of housing options, for the year-round population, including housing geared for low-income families, rental housing, and housing for the elderly.

The housing affordability gap between home costs and what families can afford has reached crisis proportions. Year-round residents are forced to do the “Island shuffle” – vacating their winter housing between May and September to look for temporary shelter. Considerable effort will be needed to respond to the pressing housing needs simply not met by the private market, namely general affordable/community housing, seasonal workforce housing, and housing for seniors and others needing assisted living.

A TARGET

MAKE 10% OF OUR YEAR-ROUND HOUSING STOCK PERMANENTLY AFFORDABLE TO PEOPLE EARNING LESS THAN THE AREA MEDIAN INCOME, AND ANOTHER 10% AFFORDABLE TO THOSE EARNING UP TO 150% AMI (ABOUT 650 DWELLING UNITS IN EACH CATEGORY FOR THE MODEST GROWTH SCENARIO).

SOME KEY PROPOSALS

Allow additional density for new affordable and community housing in appropriate locations.

This would create hundreds of extra housing units that are permanently deed-restricted for affordable housing (under 80% of Area Median Income) or community housing (under 150% AMI). We should:

§   Allow an additional “accessory” affordable housing unit on appropriate properties,

§   Allow multi-unit community housing in certain areas,

§   Adopt demolition delay bylaws to encourage house preservation or reuse, and

§   Establish amnesty programs to address the issue of illegal apartments.

Increase funding for affordable and community housing.

Since much of this housing is subsidized, it needs additional reliable ongoing sources of revenue. We could accomplish much of this by:

§   Encouraging each town to adopt a Municipal Affordable Housing Trust Fund.

§   Creating the Martha's Vineyard Housing Bank.

§   Providing tax incentives to owners who rent housing units on a year-round basis.

§   Seeking Island-wide cost-sharing for infrastructure and services,

§   Requiring affordable housing mitigation for market development projects, and

§   Considering taxing weekly housing rentals.

Streamline the planning and management of affordable housing efforts.

Several proposed methods include coordinating the affordable/community housing application process, and considering measures to reduce legal challenges to affordable housing projects.

Encourage public-private partnerships to address seasonal workforce housing needs.

Private and public sectors should work together to create dormitory or other housing for the influx of 5,000 seasonal workers. We could also consider revising zoning to allow more recreational camping.

Increase the supply of housing for seniors and others needing assisted living housing.

The huge increase in the number of elderly people on the Vineyard will mean we need to increase services to those who want to age at home (see Social Environment) and will also have to substantially increase the amount of elderly housing and assisted living communities for seniors.

Livelihood & Commerce

The main thrust of our effort should be to strengthen and balance the economy, to support local ownership, to replace imports by exports especially of such essentials as food and energy, and to increase year-round jobs with living wages.

The Vineyard economy is largely driven by its vacationers and seasonal residents, through their spending, donations, and taxes. We need to keep this part of the economy – hospitality, construction, and real estate - robust, vital, and responsive to changing needs. At the same time, a more diverse and stronger year-round economy would be good for Island residents. The goal is to help year-round residents live meaningful and productive lives and help build a vibrant economy that inspires, welcomes, and enables those who grow up here to stay or return.

SOME KEY PROPOSALS

Promote business development to diversify and balance the economy and to generate interesting, meaningful, career path jobs.

We should start new businesses that provide good, year-round jobs, while strengthening and gradually realigning our traditional core industries.

We should develop the creative stewardship of the Island’s rich natural resource base by expanding farming and fishing, by developing new strategies to harness local renewable energy resources, and by encouraging the business community to actively celebrate and support the Island’s beauty and heritage, and its non-profit sector.

We should promote the expansion of other new business opportunities appropriate to the Vineyard, emphasizing initiatives that are environmentally benign or restorative by:

·   Providing entrepreneurial training, mentorship, and technical support to sole-proprietors and micro-businesses in the for-profit sector;

·   Creating new financial mechanisms such as a revolving loan fund to promote investment in local enterprise;

·   Facilitating remote work and telecommuting;

·   Strengthening the health and human service sector to meet the needs of an aging population and growing number of retirees; and

·   Establishing and marketing a Martha’s Vineyard “brand”.

At the same time, we should strengthen and gradually re-align our core, visitor-based economic activities with the other purposes of the Island Plan. For example, we should create a world-class “heritage” tourism program. We should also consider the potential impact of chain businesses on the Island character and economy, and consider regulating them.

Use the community’s buying power to keep more dollars circulating within the local economy.

We should keep more money from our expenditures circulating on-Island to multiply positive impacts on the community’s overall economic health. An integrated “buy local” campaign should include the significant non-retail sectors (e.g. financing and insurance). We should establish an Island-based buying coop to provide Islander discounts for products and services that must be obtained off-Island.

Locate commercial activities appropriately and ensure there is sufficient commercial land for future needs.

This involves:

§   Keeping retail activities and visitor services concentrated in vibrant, walkable, areas within town centers,

·   Ensuring each town center has a full range of essential anchor businesses,

·   Ensuring there is sufficient land to satisfy the range of needed commercial activities,

·   Ensuring home businesses are compatible with their surrounding neighborhoods.

Natural Environment

Over 40% of the open space we take for granted on the Vineyard could be developed. Some favorite vistas could be blocked, wild stretches of tree-canopied rural roads could become rows of houses with front lawns, and farm fields could become subdivisions. Over time, areas of open land still large enough to support a rich population of plants and animals could be so fragmented – with a road here, a house and lawn there – that their biodiversity, and even the survival of some extremely rare species, is threatened. We need to better protect the remaining open spaces, vistas, farms, and habitat; we can also go a long way to restoring areas that have been compromised in the past.

Targets

double the natural habitat in the five Eco-Regions critical for biodiversity. create a continuous greenway/trail network that extends from one end of the Vineyard to the other, with cross links to the north and south shores. grow enough food to meet at least 20% of our year-round needs.

SOME KEY PROPOSALS

Safeguard the most important natural areas of the Island as open space.

Strategies to increase acquisition of open space include: establishing clear standards for MVC and local regulatory boards to require partial open space protection as properties are developed; working with property owners and public entities to restore and manage their lands in ways that further open space goals, giving tax abatements for open space preservation; and establishing a program allowing long-term voluntary undevelopment of critical natural properties.

Restore and maintain conditions to support viable populations of the Vineyard’s native species.

To protect Minimum Viable Landscapes in the Island’s five eco-regions, we should adopt performance standards to maintain their biodiversity, including limiting habitat destruction and fragmentation, and specialized management techniques such as prescribed burnings. We should cultivate a culture of stewardship; by establishing a program facilitating Landscaping the Vineyard Way, and promoting stewardship to students and the public.

Provide recreational enjoyment of natural lands and waters.

We should increase opportunities for residents and visitors to enjoy open space by: setting up an Access Revival Initiative to re-establish public shoreline access and securing new access; extending the Greenway/Trail network from Gay Head to Chappaquiddick with cross connections to the north and south shores; encouraging landowners to allow more access; ensuring there is a public open space within walking distance of town-dwellers and bringing the greenway network close to neighborhoods; providing continuous waterfront access in the centers of the Down-Island towns.

Protect and restore the distinctive natural character and scenic values of Martha’s Vineyard.

We should protect roadside and coastal vistas and viewsheds by carefully managing developments with significant visual impacts. Site plan review is an effective tool, along with some numeric standards and outright prohibitions. Public buildings and grounds should be made to lead the way, showcasing good examples instead of bad.

Increase farming, fishing, and food production.

We should increase efforts to protect and increase farmland by setting up an Agricultural Commission to facilitate all aspects of farming, increasing food production per acre, using value-added techniques to transform some harvested crops into other food products, and facilitating distribution, promotion, and marketing of local food. We should increase fishing by restoring pond health, by expanding aquaculture and seeding ponds, and by providing dock space and infrastructure for commercial fishing.

Prepare for climate change.

In addition to doing our share to reduce climate change, we must plan how to adapt to its inevitable impacts. This includes limiting construction in risk-prone areas, retrofitting existing structures and infrastructure, and carrying out comprehensive pre-disaster planning and mitigation.

Social Environment

Vineyard life reflects small-town America. It is marked by strong community connections, a high level of public involvement and empowerment, strong attachment to the land and sea, and a special relation between year-round and seasonal residents. Behind the rural façade is a community of great sophistication. The Vineyard’s insularity and desirability as place to visit and live are both a strength and a challenge. We will need a concerted effort to maintain a viable, diverse, year-round community. We also should not only provide good health, educational and human services, but also give the community opportunities to make healthy living, lifetime learning, and cultural expression integral parts of daily life.

Concerns have been raised about community changes, such as increased polarization by income, the threatened loss of the middle class, the rapidly aging population and the decrease in the number of families with children. Poverty, mental illness, and substance abuse incident rates exceed levels in much of the Commonwealth. The low population density leads to heavy car use, less walking, and more isolated living situations. The isolation and limited population of the Island make it difficult to offer a full range of medical services and educational services and, combined with the high cost of housing and living, makes it hard to attract, train, and retain specialized personnel.

SOME KEY PROPOSALS

Maintain the Vineyard’s strong sense of community and inclusiveness, preserve the economic continuum, and increase understanding among groups.

Measures to preserve the diversity of Vineyard in terms of year-round/seasonal, income, age, ethnicity, color, and understanding between groups should include:

§   improving coordination among institutions and town boards to deal with social environment issues,

§   reaching out to the Brazilian community, and

§   providing information to new residents and visitors about Vineyard services and practices.

Make Martha's Vineyard a healthy community.

The aim is to create a healthy and supportive environment in which people develop physically, mentally and socially and to improve human and infrastructure capacity to provide necessary health and human services that are seamless, complementary, coordinated and accessible by:

§   Providing more education to and support of family caregivers,

§   Improving availability of daycare,

§   Creating a structure to address public health issues Island-wide,

§   Creating walkable neighborhoods and communities.

Turn the whole Vineyard into a school-without-walls.

This involves opening schools to the community and the community to broader education by providing excellent quality, community-based K-12 education for students in the school system, and encouraging and enabling all residents and visitors to pursue education throughout their lives. Strategies include:

§   Providing greater vocational training in schools geared to employment opportunities on the Island and away,

§   Providing more opportunities for community-based education for school students,

§   Increasing professional development programs, and

§   Providing more post secondary education for residents and visitors.

Increase coordination and support of the arts and culture community.

Martha’s Vineyard has a strong arts community that would be improved by bringing various groups together to foster cultural expression, to support the diverse for-profit and non-profit arts sector, to promote Vineyard culture to the local and visiting community, and to increase cultural tourism, by creating an Arts/Cultural Collaborative to support and coordinate cultural activities (with projects such as a Vineyard Arts website and setting up an Island-wide Arts Festival) and offering more courses and workshops.

Transportation

We must take measures to accommodate the increasing number of people coming to and moving around the Island, including the summer influx, without altering the network of two-lane rural roads essential to the Island’s character. The goal is to reduce dependence on private automobiles and promote alternate modes of travel – bus, bicycle, and walking – for both residents and visitors.

The relatively spread-out settlement on much of the Island makes it more challenging to offer alternative means of transportation to the car, especially outside town centers. Nevertheless, we’ve done well in promoting alternative transportation, such as expanding the VTA from a seasonal shuttle service carrying 71,000 people in 1997 to a year-round service carrying over a million in 2008. We need to do more to improve transit, biking, and pedestrian facilities, including better promotion and using mitigation fees on development projects.

A TARGET

WE SHOULD EXPAND THE USE OF ALTERNATIVE MEANS OF TRANSPORTATION TO ABSORB ALL FUTURE GROWTH, SO THERE IS NO OVERALL INCREASE IN CAR USE.

SOME KEY PROPOSALS

Improve the efficiency and promotion of the Island’s buses, taxis, and ferries.

We should:

§   Create public-private alliances to improve and promote alternative transportation,

§   Develop plans to expand bus service including uptown-downtown shuttles,

§   Implement a hybrid taxi/bus service,

§   Better integrate the Steamship Authority into Island transportation planning initiatives,

§   Offer detailed trip planners,

§   Improve taxi regulations, training, quality, and dispatching, and

§   Consider rebranding the transit system.

Make town and village areas more pedestrian and bicycle friendly and expand and enhance a safe and efficient network of off-road bicycle paths, on-road bicycle routes, and walking trails.

We should

§   Create a working group in each town to outline and implement a pedestrian/bicycle improvement program, including sidewalks and crosswalks, and bike parking.

§   Require public review of road repair and improvements to ensure that they include opportunities for pedestrian/bicycle improvements.

§   Fill in the gaps in the current 37-mile network of off-road bike paths (Shared User Paths) and improve the safety of existing ones with better buffers and signage.

§   Carry out safety improvements for on-road biking, such as wider shoulders, and should extend the network of walking trails.

Use physical traffic calming techniques to slow traffic and improve safety in neighborhoods.

We should create work groups in each town to outline and implement measures such as road narrowing, safety islands, and speed humps.

Minimize road congestion and improve safety without compromising road character and scenic roadside views.

We should address problems at the Island’s most dangerous and congested road locations, favoring management rather than physical solutions. We should also address the shortage of parking in town centers during the summer.

Water Resources

We are fortunate to have a vast supply of fresh groundwater many times the amount we can foresee ever needing. More problematic is the deterioration of the water quality in our fragile coastal ponds as a result of excessive nitrogen, coming largely from wastewater. The goal is to maintain the quality and quantity of our water resources, from our taps to our ponds.

The Island’s twenty-one coastal ponds are important for commercial and recreational shellfishing, for boating, and as habitat. Their 290 miles of waterfront provide public and private beaches, and highly desirable settings for homeowners. We must protect groundwater quality where we draw drinking water and ensure that public water supply pumping and distribution infrastructure keeps pace with demand. Wastewater regulations are designed to protect public health, but since ponds are more sensitive to nitrogen than humans, we will have to bring nitrogen levels down far more to restore the health of ponds and other surface waters. The wastewater from our rapid growth over the past generation has degraded the quality of some of our groundwater and surface waters so that of our 21 coastal ponds, 8 are now impaired, and 5 are compromised. Eelgrass health is the best indicator of good quality surface and ground water; the roughly 3000 acres of eelgrass in the 1950s has now plummeted to about 1500 acres.

SOME TARGETS

RESTORE THE HEALTH OF OUR COASTAL PONDS BY LIMITING GROWTH IN SENSITIVE WATERSHEDS, BY IMPROVING WASTEWATER TREATMENT THROUGH INCREASED USE OF PUBLIC SEWERS OR SMALL-SCALE NEIGHBORHOOD TREATMENT SYSTEMS, AND BY INCREASING POND WATER CIRCULATION THROUGH DREDGING AND MORE FREQUENT OPENINGS TO THE SEA.

SOME KEY PROPOSALS

Expand public water supply and protect supply recharge areas.

We should plan for expansion of public water supply – presently serving 2/3 of homes – especially to areas with more than one house per acre. Future water demand will require identifying and protecting new public well sites, mainly in and around the Correllus State Forest. In less dense areas unlikely to be served by public water, we should strengthen regulations and monitoring of private wells to protect water quality.

Treat and dispose of wastewater in a manner that protects our water resources.

Wastewater is the largest source of nitrogen pollution that can be controlled at the local level. It is the cause of declining water quality in our ponds. We need to treat wastewater to support sustainable drinking water supplies, protect public health, and protect surface water resources. We should prepare a Wastewater Management Plan, preferably Island wide or, at least watershed-based to identify the most cost-effective solutions, which will probably include: A combination of expanded sewers -- offering centralized or package wastewater treatment -- in higher density areas, and cluster treatment systems in more isolated areas. Possibly using individual on-site systems with advanced nitrogen removal in some areas. The cost will likely be more than $100 million to deal with the present situation, and could be several times that with future growth.

Minimize direct discharge of stormwater runoff into sensitive water resources.

By retaining stormwater on site and allowing for infiltration to replenish groundwater instead of running it directly into coastal waters, we can largely remove bacteria, silt, oil products, heavy metals and even nitrogen from stormwater discharges at relatively low cost.

We should set up a program to identify and correct problematic stormwater discharges from roads and other public lands; to require development and redevelopment projects to maximize treatment and infiltration in order to retain all stormwater on site; to incorporate Low Impact Development techniques into project review; to enforce impervious surface lot coverage limits, and to put in place stormwater system design and maintenance programs to limit treatment and disposal problems.

Increase management of coastal ponds and their watersheds to reduce nitrogen loads and allow eelgrass recovery.

As sound data becomes available from the Mass Estuaries Project we should set up management committees to prepare plans for each coastal pond that would find the most cost effective ways to restore pond health, such as improving water circulation through dredging, removal of tidal restrictions and increased managed openings to the sea, increasing shellfish production in coastal ponds by increasing habitat area and quality; and reducing bacterial contamination that closes shellfish beds.

Introduction 1.5: Making It Happen

2009-07-28T12:03:00.000-04:00

In many ways, the Island Plan proposals for the next generation will help keep the Vineyard much as it is today with carefully protected open spaces, vistas, and historic neighborhoods, and with great services. It will still be a vital year-round community, partly because thousands of families can live community and affordable housing.

But in many ways, the Island will be different, and much improved. Though tourism and construction will still be important parts of the economy, many people will have transitioned to well-paying, year-round “green” and knowledge-based jobs, attracting many young people to stay on the Island. Farming and fishing will be revived and feeding a good portion of the population. The equivalent of all our energy will come from a community-owned offshore wind farm. There will be an Island-wide greenway and trail network. New buildings will fit into their neighborhoods.

The full Island Plan outlines how the Vineyard community can turn this vision into reality, utilizing about 201 strategies: business initiatives, educational efforts, incentives, projects, and regulations. Many of these initiatives are already underway; some have informed the Plan, others emerged from the planning process.

We are not alone in taking up this new direction. Recent and upcoming federal and state programs enable and support many of the efforts outlined in the Island Plan. And there are many other communities like us who are creatively taking on similar challenges, and with whom we can share solutions.

Though the Island Plan is not an ongoing entity able to implement any proposals itself, the Steering Committee and Work Groups can help initiate implementation by facilitating meetings of key stakeholders and by assisting efforts as they get underway (with technical assistance by the MVC).

Towns and the MVC could change how they regulate development, using Island Plan policies and maps. The MVC should change its criteria for referring projects to the Commission to ensure that it reviews projects of regional impact, but eliminate the need to refer smaller, less problematic projects.

Periodic monitoring of the community’s progress in implementing the Island Plan will allow us to make the necessary adjustments to reach our objectives, or to revise objectives if they are no longer relevant. The Island Plan website will be transformed to serve as a main focus for monitoring progress.

It could be tempting to feel that nothing can be done to overcome the challenges facing the Vineyard: economic forces are too powerful, Town Meeting won’t support zoning or other changes, we’re already too far gone to save.

But that’s just not the Vineyard way.

Our knowledgeable and highly engaged community has been tested many times in the past, often emerging with our own creative solutions.

We set up the Vineyard Transit Authority and overcame town rivalries to create the Regional High School. We created strong non-profit organizations and the Land Bank, which preserved 40% of the Island as open space. We created hundreds of affordable homes that will be available for generations to come. We set up the Martha's Vineyard Commission, an innovative and effective way to help towns regulate development, later copied to create the Cape Cod Commission. We created grassroots organizations to take on the challenges of housing affordability and energy.

And we can do it again. Instead of letting the Vineyard drift off into a future that isn’t what we want, we can take charge of the Island’s future and change course.

Implementing the recommendations of the Island Plan will lead to a better future for the Vineyard. Your input and support can help make it happen. First, you can give your opinion on this draft plan in the ways described on the next page. Then, you can support implementation by pursuing the new business and job opportunities, by participating in community organizations, and with your vote at Town Meeting as various measures come up for approval, and in the individual choices you make in your home and in your lives.

Development & Growth 2.0: Introduction

2009-07-27T22:00:00.000-04:00

Note: The projections in this section are preliminary and will be revised when the development and growth scenarios are re-run in September. Check the Island Plan website for the latest version.

The current zoning across Martha's Vineyard is a reflection of a series of decisions made over the past forty years. This was done without little or no comprehensive analysis of what kind of development could result on the Island, and what the implications of this development might be. The Island Plan provides our community the opportunity to step back and ask ourselves if this is what we really want.

Today there are about 17,100 homes and other principal buildings on the Island (about 15,600 main buildings and 1,500 guest houses). With current zoning and available land, as many as 11,800 more homes and main buildings could be added (7,400 main houses and more than 4,400 guest houses), an increase of 74%. This would translate into a year-round population that mushrooms from the current 15,444 to about 27,000 people, if the portion year-round homes remains at 44%. (The Island’s population could theoretically go to about 62,000 if all allowed homes are built and all seasonal homes became year-round.)

Public input into this plan indicates that most of the Vineyard community wants the Vineyard to stay much as it is today; or go back to the way it was in the years when they were born or first moved here, if this were possible.

Most people are generally unhappy with the recent pace and type of development on the Island, or with the future that present growth trends would take us to. They feel that continuing growth is undermining the Island’s character and environment – key to our visitor-based economy – and that excessive development could kill the goose that laid the golden egg. It was noted that growth for growth’s sake is the philosophy of a cancer cell. In surveys, forums, and meetings, most people say that they want limited growth, which is carefully managed as to amount, location, pace, and design. They want development that is especially restricted in critical natural areas, that doesn’t exceed the carrying capacity of the Island, and that better serves the needs of the year-round population. Almost everyone who responded to surveys or participated in Island Plan forums, said that the Vineyard should move to a more sustainable economy, less dependent on growth.

In surveys of almost 3,000 Vineyarders and visitors in 2003 and 2004:

§ 95% said protecting the Vineyard’s environment and character was a high priority; 7% said promoting development and growth was a high priority;

§ 76% said the summer population should not grow very much; 7% said it could grow without problems,

§ 65% said controls over the quantity and quality of development should be strengthened; 7% said they should be relaxed.

At the other end of the spectrum, some believe that growth is intrinsically good. They feel that continuing growth is vital to our economy, allowing business to expand and profits to rise, especially for the construction industry that accounts for 13% of Vineyard jobs and 17% of businesses.

It may well be impossible to get everyone in the community to agree which philosophy is correct. Fortunately, we don’t need unanimity about this, as long as we can agree that certain kinds of development are inappropriate in certain locations, and other kinds of development are desirable, or at least acceptable, in other places. The focus of the Island Plan, and especially this section, is to identify what kinds of development are appropriate, and where.

Several of the Island Plan’s Overall Goals (page 1-9) reflect what people favored with respect to growth, namely concentrating future development in town and village areas and limiting building in environmentally sensitive areas; reinforcing compact, mixed-use, walkable town and village centers; ensuring that a significant portion of the development that does takes place serves the real needs of the community, and ensuring that new building is compatible in its scale, siting, and design.

It should be noted that there is some reluctance to change the way we manage growth or run the community, for several reasons.

· There is strong pressure to build more houses to accommodate a continuing desire of people to live here. One survey indicated that over half the seasonal residents and even a fifth of one-week visitors anticipate living here in the future. Is it possible to accommodate everyone who wants to be here and still maintain those characteristics of the Vineyard that people want to preserve?

· There is inertia when it comes to changing zoning or other regulations, a reluctance to revise them even if existing regulations would lead the Vineyard to the very future that people say they don’t want.

· Perhaps most importantly are the enormous property values that reflect current zoning. Each possible future house or guest house is seen as potentially worth a considerable amount of money, sometime in the future. This could translate into a difference between what people feel is best for the Island, and how willing they are to limit what they might do with their individual properties.

Also, there is a phenomenon of shifting expectations. As new waves of people move here who are not familiar of what the Vineyard was like before, the community becomes more accepting of a more developed place, more similar to suburban, off-Island America.

Note that this section mainly discusses residential development, because 98% of the Island is zoned residential; however, most of the recommendations also apply to land used for commercial and other uses. (See section 5.4 for a specific discussion of commercial and industrial development.) The section looks primarily at new buildings that increase the total number of buildings on the Island, though many proposals also affect modifications or replacements of existing buildings.

Development & Growth 2.1: Amount and Location of Growth

2009-07-27T21:59:00.000-04:00

The first two key issues related to development and growth are:

· The desired amount of overall development and

· Where such growth should occur.

These issues bear on questions such as how many new houses could or should be built? How much of a population increase would that mean? How much of the currently undeveloped land would end up being either developed or protected as open space?

Number of Houses: As noted on page 2-2, present zoning and available land would allow construction of about 7,400 additional main houses and other primary buildings on Martha's Vineyard.

In addition, construction of guest houses could have an increasing impact on the Vineyard. As the number of available building lots declines, there will likely be increasing desire to add guest houses. A preliminary estimate is that present zoning would allow about 9,000 additional guest houses. Though limited in size, each could accommodate a family and thereby generate similar impacts to a main house. Even if only a portion of the possible guest houses were built, the total increase in the number of houses and the corresponding increase in population would significantly change the character of Martha's Vineyard. (The projections in this section are based on construction of 4,4000 guest houses, about half the preliminary estimate, to be revised in the final Plan.)

Present Density Map

Present Land Use: Currently, of the 57,000 acres of land on the Island:

· 30% is fully developed (16,980 acres, in 2008),

· 40% is protected open space (22, 889 acres),

· 30% is “available” for future development or protection (17,181acres), namely 19% on parcels with no development and 11% that could be subdivided off from partially developed parcels.

Each year, about 800 additional acres of land are developed and 200 acres are protected as open space. If this trend continues, about 80% of the “available” land – 13,000 acres of woods or fields that we now take for granted as part of the Island’s open space – would end up being developed.

Location of Development: Up to about 1970, most of the Island’s settlement pattern was structured around the three main town centers – Edgartown, Oak Bluffs, and Vineyard Haven – that were surrounded by dense, traditional neighborhoods. Elsewhere, there were a few small village centers – West Tisbury, North Tisbury, Menemsha, Beetlebung Corner – but most of the Island was rural, with farms and wooded areas sprinkled with housing.

In the 1970s, the pace of development surged in the 1970s and began moving increasingly to the countryside, where it has the greatest impact on the Island’s most significant natural resources. Since then, substantial growth resulted in newer, car-oriented subdivisions close to town or in rural areas, and a lot more housing in rural areas. The town centers of Edgartown and Vineyard Haven are now split between their historic downtown sections and their newer, car-oriented, uptown areas.

Based on available land and current zoning, this trend of spreading out development will accelerate in the future, with almost half (48%) of new development scattered across the countryside, compared to 24% before 1970 and 34% from 1970 to 2005. Development in town would drop to 34%, compared to 70% before 1970 and 43% from 1970-2005.

Development in or close to towns:

§ Makes best use of existing infrastructure such as roads, sewer, and town water,

§ Makes it easier for people to walk, bike, or take a bus to most destinations (increasing mobility for those with limited car access, and reducing car use and related congestion, energy use, and pollution), and

§ Makes it feasible to treat wastewater in plants that remove most of the damaging nitrogen.

Development in the countryside has the greatest impact on significant natural resources, destroying or fragmenting significant habitat.

§ Forces most people into their cars for most trips, since it is not practical to provide good transit in very low density areas, especially to houses up rural roads.

§ Means depending on individual, on-site septic systems that don’t remove enough nitrogen from wastewater to avoid polluting coastal ponds.

Growth Scenarios and their Impacts: The Island Plan prepared three scenarios outlining a range of possibilities for future growth, with varying amounts and locations of development. It contrasts what would happen with a continuation of Present Trends (buildout based on present zoning on available land), with a Modest Growth Scenario (based on a reduction in development, especially in environmentally sensitive areas), and a No Net Growth Scenario (with very little additional development, offset by “undevelopment” in other areas).

The table on page 2-8 describes these scenarios, and looks at their impacts using nine indicators. Comparing these impacts illustrates why continuing the trends of the past thirty years is not sustainable or desirable. Developing all available land as presently permitted under existing zoning would result in excessive growth that would undermine those characteristics of Martha's Vineyard that residents and visitors treasure the most.

By some measures, such as feeding ourselves, we have long passed a sustainable level. For other factors, we are at a tipping point. Two especially critical factors are traffic and wastewater, because of the inherent limits of the Island’s network of two-lane roads to absorb more traffic and of the Island’s natural ecosystems to absorb more water-borne nitrogen.

Since traffic congestion rises exponentially as we approach and exceed the capacity of our network of two-lane roads, excessive growth permitted by current zoning would put us into the untenable position of either accepting traffic congestion many times worse than we now experience, or facing significant, costly road widenings and installation of traffic lights in many locations; or both

Since the cost of wastewater treatment increases substantially as we exceed the capacity of natural ecosystems to treat nitrogen, excessive growth would force us to either allow our coastal ponds to become terribly polluted, or spend hundreds of millions of dollars to deal with the excessive nitrogen.

The analysis of impacts demonstrate that, if we erect all the buildings that current zoning allows, we would see the character and environment of the Island, and our quality of life, deteriorate in many other tangible and intangible ways.

The Island at build-out if all available land is developed. The future lies somewhere between these two extremes. Based on present trends, about 4/5 of the available land would likely be developed.

Island at Build Out if all available land is developed. (top) The future lies somewhere between these two extremes. Based on present trends about 4/5 of the available land would likely be developed.

Island at Build-Out if all available land as open space (bottom)

Relation Between Growth and Property Values: In the past decade, the median home sales price on the Vineyard has more than tripled and is more than double what a year-round family with a median income could afford. The primary reason property values are so high is because Martha's Vineyard is a small, beautiful island and many people in the United States wish to vacation or retire here. They can pay far more for a seasonal vacation house than can most year-round residents with an income earned on the Island. This competition with second-home buyers increasingly makes it difficult for even moderate income homebuyers to get a foothold in the Vineyard housing market. The desirability of the Vineyard, so is vital to our visitor-based economy and livelihoods, also is the principal contributor to high property values.

One concern sometimes expressed about scaling back the amount of growth is that it would make housing even less affordable. The assumption is that the law of supply and demand means that limiting the number of houses will result in a corresponding increase in cost. However, there is no evidence that open space protection or other measures that limit growth would have a significant enough impact on demand from off-Island to reduce high property values. Even if there were 50% more houses on the Island today, there are enough off-Islanders wanting to purchase an East Coast, seaside vacation home that the prices would probably stay pretty much where they are today. Even if the prices went down a bit, the average house would still be totally out of the reach of most year-round residents.

Simply allowing for more houses would not significantly impact housing affordability. This needs targeted measures such as the ones outlined in section 5 (Housing).

Relation Between Growth and the Construction Industry: A second concern about the possibility of scaling back the amount and rate of development is its relation with the construction industry, which is important to the Vineyard economy. Over the past two decades, the number of new home starts declined from about 700 to about 200 a year (not counting the drop to about 100 in 2008 due to the recession). However, the number of Vineyarders working in construction has remained constant since 1985 at about 15% of all jobs. This is because the construction industry was once dependent almost exclusively on new development on undeveloped land, but in recent years, 25-40% of the annual value of construction is for additions, renovations, and replacements of existing buildings. This includes about 15% for new houses or guest houses on already developed lots.

As the Island recovers from the current economic crisis (which is hitting construction especially hard), it is likely that an even lower proportion of construction jobs come from building new homes on vacant land, so reducing the rate of this type of development would have a limited impact on the total number of construction jobs. We can also anticipate that, as workers get older or based on changing job opportunities, a few hundred construction workers may transition over to the new growth sectors of the economy outlined in section 6 (Livelihood & Commerce).

Relation Between Growth and Taxes: A third concern about limiting new development is the impact on property taxes, or of “taking land off the tax rolls”. An MVC study of this several years ago indicated that residential development costs more than the taxes it pays, and that open space protection results in lower costs to the town. Over the past twenty years, the population of West Tisbury grew from 1,000 to 2,600, and its tax rate spiked upwards. Most kinds of development end up costing a town more than the taxes they bring in, though the impact of seasonal homes has not been analyzed.

Land Use Mapping: The preparation of the Island Plan involved extensive analysis and detailed mapping of the Island according to a variety of interrelated criteria. Six key maps are the:

1. Natural Resources Map

2. Water Resources Map

3. Hazard Mitigation Map

4. Built Environment Map

5. Housing Development Suitability Map

6. Economic Development Suitability Map

These maps were combined to produce the Vineyard Land Use Guidance Map. It identifies which areas are most appropriate for additional development and in which it is preferable to limit the amount of development and or preserve land as open space.

The map divides the land into two main areas- Town areas and Rural Areas- and nine sub categories that can accommodate various amounts of growth and that seek varying levels of resource protection and protection of existing character.

Objective D1: Preserve and reinforce the traditional settlement pattern of the Island.

The Island’s traditional settlement pattern, with three main town centers, several villages, and a rural countryside, has been somewhat undermined by the spread and visibility of development throughout the Island. We can not only limit further deterioration, but we can restore many of the areas where recent development is not in keeping with desired development patterns.

· Strategy D1-1: Limit significant new development in outlying areas: We should avoid creating new areas of commercial development, new town centers, or large, dense neighborhoods in other parts of the Island. Large and dense new subdivisions should remain prohibited, though we should allow smaller clusters of housing in rural areas when they are combined with open space protection, especially for affordable housing.

· Strategy D1-2: Restore and improve areas that were developed in problematic ways in the past: There are many ways that we can “heal” areas which were developed in ways that undermine the Island’s traditional development patterns. Car-oriented, mainly single-use commercial areas can be transformed into mixed-use, pedestrian-oriented areas better linked to the historic town centers. Destroyed or fragmented habitat in rural areas can be restored, as can the character of country roads with overly visible new development. .

Objective D2: Reduce the amount of future development, especially in environmentally sensitive areas.

A development approach that results in an amount of development somewhere between Scenarios 1 and 2, with less total growth than what is currently permitted, especially in environmentally sensitive locations, would provide a better balance between allowing for a reasonable amount of growth and the desire to protect the qualities of Martha's Vineyard.

Achieving the objective of reducing the total amount of future development – for the whole Island or for specific areas – would involve using a combination of several of the following techniques that deal directly with density. In addition, some of the other strategies throughout the Island Plan will likely also result in less overall new development. (See also the recommendations about commercial and industrial development in section 6.)

· Strategy D2-1: Adopt the Vineyard Land Use Guidance Map: The Vineyard Land Use Guidance Map, described in section 2.4, is central to changing the amount and especially the location of future development. It shows which parts of the Island should have little or no development – such as the Resource Protection Areas – and where additional development is desirable, or at least more acceptable – such as the Business and Opportunity Areas. Once finalized and adopted, it should provide the framework for other measures that should be adopted by each Town and the MVC, such as the other tools described below.

· Strategy D2-2: Change zoning regulations affecting density: The most straightforward single tool is to change zoning regulations to increase or decrease the minimum lot sizes required to build multi-family buildings, single-family houses, guest houses, and accessory units, as well as non-residential development. This might include reducing or enlarging the districts where each of these uses is permitted. It could also be more permissive or restrictive about having more than one dwelling unit on a property – guest houses, accessory units, and assisted living or retirement communities – in certain areas. For example, in Resource Protection Areas (explained in section 2.4), it would be desirable to increase the minimum lot sizes for main houses, or at least for guest houses; in Business and Opportunity Areas, the extent of zones where multi-family housing is allowed could be enlarged. Also, allowing more accessory units in certain areas is a way to accommodate more families without making a major change to the neighborhood’s character. In older neighborhoods, revising the lot dimensions so they are similar to what they were when the areas were first built would reinforce the traditional character, and would allow for infill development. A related measure is to be more permissive about the construction on substandard lots in areas where growth is favored.

· Strategy D2-3: Revise subdivision regulations: In addition to the changes to minimum lot sizes, other changes to subdivision regulations could limit further subdivision of existing parcels in highly sensitive areas, such as the Critical Resource Protection Areas. Also, the MVC Act could be used to ensure that so-called Approval Not Required (ANR) subdivisions, which are currently exempt from town review in Massachusetts, are reviewed on the Vineyard.

· Strategy D2-4: Increase tax incentives for land preservation: Several tax incentives already encourage protection of agricultural land or preservation of open space. Possible measures that could be used to encourage the preservation of private land include lowering municipal tax rates on open space.

· Strategy D2-5: Accelerate the rate of open space protection: Increasing the rate of open space preservation from the current 200 [150?] acres per year could be helped by creating additional sources of revenue, and target acquisition based on the Land Use Guidance Map, to prioritize areas of significant natural resources.

· Strategy D2-6: Set up redevelopment programs for opportunity areas. The Island Plan has identified several Opportunity Areas where there could be significant transformation in the coming decades. The redevelopment of these areas could include setting an overall concept, preparing an urban design plan, changing zoning, carrying out public improvements, and promoting development. (See section 3.4 for more detail about Opportunity Areas.)

· Strategy D2-7: Extend and finance infrastructure in growth areas, and limit infrastructure connections in conservation areas: Towns could adopt policies provide town water and sewer in priority development areas – with the community shouldering much or all of the cost – in order to facilitate development where growth is desirable. However, in order to avoid encouraging development where it is not wanted, infrastructure connections should be restricted, or if allowed, be charged entirely to property owner. In most areas where public water or sewers are extended for public or environmental health reasons as opposed to intentionally supporting or promoting development, it is important that extensions of municipal infrastructure be accompanied by “growth neutral” restrictions that don’t allow more development than what would have been previously allowed without the extended infrastructure.

Strategy D2-8: Consider setting up a system of Transfer of Development Rights (TDR): TDR involves transferring development rights from a "sending district" a "receiving district". It seeks to use private market forces to protect open space in environmentally sensitive areas by making it possible to sell development rights to an area where development is desired or, at least, more acceptable. Though in theory this solves many problems, it has been difficult to put into practice. On the Vineyard, there would be difficulties in dealing with inter-town transfers and the drastically different property values between potential sending and receiving districts. In some off-Island communities, this type of value differential is dealt with by allowing extra dwellings to be built in the receiving area for each one not built in the sending area; something that would probably not be acceptable here since it would result in more overall growth. While TDR may have limitations for use on the Vineyard, we should be open to some permutation of the technique.

Development & Growth 2.2: Rate of Growth

2009-07-27T21:58:00.000-04:00

Until the 2008 economic downturn, about 200 permits were issued each year for new main homes on undeveloped land– compared to an average of about 400 yearly in the 1980s and about 250 in the 1990s. At the 200 per year rate, it would take about 30 years to issue the 6,000 permits for potential new main homes on the remaining land currently zoned for homes. This is called “build-out”. (This does not include the replacement of existing buildings with new ones, but does factor in additional available land continuing to be protected as open space.)

The current world economic crisis is resulting in a considerable slowdown in the number of homes being built. After previous recessions, growth rates generally picked up where they left off, and the same thing may well happen again here. Alternatively, we can take advantage of the current situation to put in place a framework that would pace the rate of development in the future at the rate that best serves community needs.

From the 1970s to 1990s, the Vineyard towns and the MVC routinely limited the rate of construction within large subdivisions to temper the rate of community change; however, current development is mostly on single lots or small subdivisions. Vineyard towns have also used building caps, limiting the number of home building permits allotted per year in each town. In Massachusetts, the Commonwealth generally limits their use to short time periods and the Vineyard towns’ caps have lapsed or are lapsing. However, proposed revisions to the Commonwealth’s zoning act (Chapter 40A) – called the Land Use Partnership Act – would allow the use of rate of development regulations on an ongoing basis.

There are several potential advantages of slowing down the rate of growth, or limiting it to its current rate.

· It would keep a steady rate of construction work without debilitating peaks or valleys.

· It would lead to more open space preservation by giving the community more time to acquire land before it can be developed.

· It could improve the quality of development projects by giving priority within an annual quota to desirable projects, such as affordable housing or locations served by town infrastructure.

· It would give the community time to absorb and adjust to the impacts of development and economic booms, and, more opportunity to modify growth management policies to deal with problems as they emerge.

Objective D3: Reduce the rate of development.

· Strategy D3-1: Implement rate of growth regulations: Implement rate of growth regulations: Island towns should adopt long term “rate of growth” regulations to limit the rate of construction to reflect current infrastructure constraints and each town’s plans to expand its capital facilities. This could be done as a District of Critical Planning Concern established by the MVC within one or more towns, or, by the towns if the proposed Land Use Partnership Act is enacted. These should be structured with flexibility and might exempt certain kinds of development, such as affordable housing and/or smart-growth locations where adequate infrastructure is already in place.

Development & Growth 2.3: Project Design

2009-07-27T21:56:00.000-04:00

Whatever number of new development projects we end up with and whatever the pace of their construction, there is concern about project design in the broadest sense. This includes making each project fit better into its surroundings and responding to other community concerns, such as housing affordability, wastewater treatment in sensitive watersheds, habitat protection, energy conservation, building design, etc.

In some ways, it is easier to deal with these issues, since they don’t affect the number of buildings that can be built. There will be less resistance from property owners to designing their projects somewhat differently, provided they are still able to build. However, even if better designed, each new house still contributes to the increase in population, traffic, and many other impacts associated with growth.

Often, several tools could be used to achieve the same design objective. Many of these tools are regulations and it will be up to each town to decide which it wants to implement.

Objective D4: Ensure that development and redevelopment projects are better planned and designed.

The other sections of the Island Plan discuss a variety of tools – including regulations, incentives, programs, and projects – for better protecting environmentally significant areas, for increasing housing affordability, for respecting community character, for minimizing visual impact in significant viewsheds and vistas. These strategies are relevant irrespective of what is decided about the amount, location, and rate of growth. For example:

· Open Space – require preservation of natural vegetation of portions of property in critical habitat areas, require no-cut zone along scenic roads (see section 7);

· Water – requirement that projects meet nitrogen-loading limits for their watersheds; use of Low-Impact-Development principles (see section 10);

· Energy – requirement that all buildings, or at least those larger than a given threshold, meet efficiency standards (see section 5);

· Building Design – design guidelines and review process to ensure that new buildings harmonize with their context, particularly in traditional older neighborhoods, and that their visibility from scenic roads and the coast are minimized (see section 3).

In general, the permitting process should ease permitting for clearly desirable projects by making more them “as of right”, while providing additional review for more sensitive projects by requiring that they have special permits, site plan review, and in some cases, MVC review. In addition to the specific strategies recommended throughout the Island Plan, there are three general strategies that are listed here, and which would impact not only the specific conception of individual projects, but could also impact the other concerns discussed above related to the amount, location, and pace of development.

· Strategy D4-1: Require project review for sensitive projects: Town boards and the MVC can use project review to ensure that the amount of development that takes place on a property is appropriate. First, the MVC could change its DRI Checklist and towns could change their regulations so that there is additional review in areas where projects propose higher densities than that preferred. (For example, with the current DRI Checklist, a ten-lot subdivision requires MVC review; in Resource Protection Areas, this could be reduced to, say, six.) Another possible approach could be to require MVC review of projects of greater than a given density in highly sensitive areas. Secondly, the MVC and town boards could use the Land Use Guidance Map in project review. For example, they could encourage higher-density Comprehensive Permit (40B) projects in Business and Opportunity Areas, and discourage them in Resource Protection Areas.

· Strategy D4-2: Provide density incentives for desirable development: There are a number of ways in which density incentives can be given to encourage desirable types of development, such as affordable and community housing. This could include allowing accessory units, allowing extra units in multi-family projects, or allowing development on smaller, original-size lots, provided the extra units were permanently deed-restricted for affordable and community housing. In areas where the minimum lot size was increased (e.g. sections of Edgartown and Oak Bluffs were changed from 5,000 to 10,000 s.f. minimums), the size could revert back to the original lot size for appropriate projects.

· Strategy D4-3: Set up a system of mitigation fees: In many communities, if a project causes impacts for wastewater, traffic, municipal services, affordable housing, the developer of the property pays mitigation fees to offset costs which must then be dealt with by the community. This system could be instituted on the Vineyard. There has to be a direct relationship between the project and the impact and the fees have to be proportional to this impact. It would be desirable to exempt affordable housing, and possibly year-round housing. Having to pay mitigation fees equal to the full cost of a projects’ impacts would have some deterrent effect on development, especially in locations where the impacts (e.g. wastewater treatment, traffic) are the highest. This could result in some reduction in the total number of buildings erected.

Built Environment 3.0: Introduction

2009-07-27T21:50:00.000-04:00

Martha's Vineyard’s beautiful, historic, and cohesive built environment – everything man-made – is among the most remarkable in the country and is an important part of the scenic beauty at the heart of the Island’s character, identity, and visitor-based economy.

It is made up of historic town and village centers, each with its own distinct character such as the white clapboard public buildings and grand residences of Edgartown, the fanciful multi-colored Victorian cottages in Oak Bluffs, and the fishing shacks of Menemsha. These are surrounded by traditional neighborhoods and linked by rural roads lined with stone walls and dotted by roadside farmhouses.

The fact that, throughout the 20^th century, we continued to use mostly traditional local forms and materials has resulted in a cohesive built environment that sets the whole Island apart from the rest of America, with its cookie-cutter suburban sprawl and its “Anywhere USA” strip commercial development.

Recent construction usually follows traditional local forms (typically a combination of several simple volumes with steeply sloping roofs) and materials (typically white siding in some towns, cedar shingles elsewhere), though there are some newer buildings, especially in suburbs, whose size, style, and materials are not in the Vineyard tradition.

Several factors now threaten this unique, coherent, high-quality built environment. Skyrocketing real estate costs lead some people to maximize use of their property by demolishing older structures and erecting buildings with that go to the limits of zoning regulations, that are too big or otherwise don’t fit their surroundings, or that are not environmentally sound. This is exacerbated by a growth in the number of people with few ties to the Vineyard who buy properties and hire architects or builders from different part of the country who come up with designs that have little relation to the Vineyard tradition or context. Just a few poorly designed buildings in highly visible locations can seriously undermine the Island’s character.

We need more pro-active tools to preserve the Vineyard’s distinct character and ensure that environmental concerns are respected, such as revised zoning for quantifiable issues such as setbacks or energy consumption, a process design review for qualitative issues, education, and incentives.

Objective B1: Increase public awareness of the Vineyard’s built environment.

On Martha's Vineyard, much attention is focused on our exceptional natural environment, while less attention is given to the Island’s outstanding built environment. This proposed strategy deals with all topics in the Built Environment section.

· Strategy B1-1: Produce a publication for property owners and building designers on what defines the Vineyard’s distinct built environment and how to protect it, on historic areas, and on green building. A guidebook on Building the Vineyard Way should be published that deals with all the issues discussed in this section, including the special features of each historic area, what defines Visually Critical Areas, and the general character of Vineyard buildings, roadscapes, public spaces, and landscaping. It should include guidelines about how protect existing buildings and features, and how new development can fit in, as well as information about green building and how to reduce environmental impacts including dark-sky compliant lighting. The key is identifying the defining characteristics of each area on the Island – typical siting, relationship to street (setback, orientation), scale, and massing, and sometimes style – and educating people so they know what they are buying into and are sensitive to the context when planning their building projects. The information contained in this document could also be made available in other ways, such as on the Internet, on community television, in information sessions, with walking tours, and in a travelling exhibit. The MVC could coordinate this with input from planning boards, historic districts commissions, and Island architects.

Built Environment 3.1: Preserve Historic Resources

2009-07-27T21:49:00.000-04:00

First and foremost for keeping the authentic, unique character of Martha's Vineyard is preserving historic buildings and other historic resources from destruction or inappropriate alteration.

Most of the Island’s historic buildings are concentrated in historic town centers, traditional neighborhoods, and along historic roads. The map on the next page identifies two types of older area which, together, include a significant proportion of the pre-1946 buildings, though they only comprise 5% of the land:

· Historic Areas: These areas have high concentrations of buildings over a hundred years old, whether or not they are now officially designated as historic districts, including the town centers of Edgartown, Oak Bluffs, Tisbury, West Tisbury, and Menemsha.

· Traditional Neighborhoods: These areas, outside the Historic Areas, have high concentrations of buildings built before the end of World War II, and/or where the urban pattern was set before the War.

The final version of the Plan will also identify Scenic Roads, the main roads of the Island, all of which pre-date World War II and are significant for a combination of historic, natural, and visual reasons.

There are about 2,000 buildings more than 100 years old on the Vineyard, and another 1,500 built up to the end of World War II. Of these, about 930 are located in the Island’s six designated Historic Districts (which cover 502 acres), four of which are on the National Register of Historic Places. Another 1900 are concentrated in Historic Areas (about 2,000 acres for the Island) and Traditional Neighborhoods (about 500 acres).

A decade ago, historic building surveys for parts of all six Island towns. Some of the surveys updated earlier, incomplete survey forms but, while not an exhaustive inventory, more than 150 structures and places were recommended for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places or Districts. Additional properties were recommended for further study. At the same time, similar archeological surveys were conducted in all towns but Tisbury.

As development pressure increases in the future, the Island’s historic buildings and other resources will be increasingly threatened by demolition, disfigurement, and inappropriate new construction that undermine the character of historic buildings, streetscapes, scenic roads, traditional villages, and other historic areas.

Objective B2: Protect historic resources – such as culturally significant buildings, streetscapes, and areas – and ensure that new development is compatible.

To improve protection of historic resources, we should identify and preserve the significant features of historic areas, streetscapes, public spaces, structures, uses, artifacts, and other resources. We should also ensure that new additions to historic structures and new infill buildings in historic areas harmonize with the defining characteristics of the existing buildings and areas. It is generally preferable to protect historic resources on an area basis, since this allows for an integrated approach to zoning and design review, and yields a cohesive environment that is to everyone’s benefit.

Strategy B2-1: Identify historic resources and area defining characteristics, and prepare guidelines. The first step in protecting historic resources is to take the existing inventories of buildings and archeology, and complete them to include all significant resources. For Historic Areas, these should indicate which buildings are the most significant and should be carefully preserved intact, which buildings are of moderate importance with more flexibility about changes or additions that don’t affect the character-defining features, and which buildings are of little value and could be altered or replaced. Guidelines should be prepared to identify the defining characteristics of each area, such as: alignment of buildings, relation to street, distance between buildings, presence of fences, volume, density, scale, materials, roof shape, solid-to-void relationship windows and doors, etc., without being overly proscriptive about style. Simple diagrams could help explain relationships. In some areas, characteristics are quite consistent and it is more important that new buildings respect these features; in other areas, there is more variation, offering more flexibility for new buildings.

· Strategy B2-2: Enlarge historic districts to protect all historic areas and traditional neighborhoods. We should enlarge historic districts and create new ones to protect the large parts of the Historic Areas and Traditional Neighborhoods identified in this plan that have no protection. This would provide for review of proposals to demolish or modify buildings. Though there might be some resistance to historic designation; however this is most effective way to protect the quality of people’s streetscape and neighborhood, and to protect their property values. For Traditional Neighborhoods, this could involve creating Neighborhood Conservation Districts, which provide more flexibility in project review.

· Strategy B2-3: Revise zoning in historic areas and traditional neighborhoods to conform to historic patterns. Often zoning is not aligned to historic patterns. If too permissive, this can lead to the demolition of historic buildings because an owner can build a much larger building on the property, and it also allows for excessively large new buildings that don’t fit into their its historic context, especially with respect to building massing and setbacks. If too restrictive, they may require much larger lot sizes or setbacks than other buildings on a street. For example, in the historic areas of Edgartown and Oak Bluffs, the minimum lot size was changed to be larger than the historic pattern, leading to bigger houses that don’t fit into the neighborhood (and are less affordable). So a fundamental principle for historic areas and traditional neighborhoods is to ensure that zoning regulations closely match the existing pattern, with respect to density, setback, and height. This could include reverting back to historic lot sizes, allowing smaller houses on smaller lots (possibly linked to a requirement that units be used only for year-round, owner-occupied housing and/or affordable housing and provided that wastewater, traffic, noise, and privacy issues have been dealt with). To allow successful historic preservation projects, zoning could provide for exemptions from some regulations such as easing parking requirements and use restrictions, allowing greater lot coverage and floor area, and allowing guest houses.

· Strategy B2-4: Improve the operation of historic districts. The most effective Historic District Commissions publish clear guidelines for preservation and harmonious new construction that help owners and architects design appropriate projects, and serve as a basis for a Commission’s review of applications (see Strategy B2-1). Historic District Commissions could also individually or collectively provide education (e.g. publications, courses, websites) and technical assistance to property owners, architects, and builders to help them make appropriate choices. Island Historic District Commissions could meet regularly to share experiences and learn about best practices on and off the Island (e.g. appropriate window types, how to deal with solar panels, use of plastic trim).

· Strategy B2-5: Designate individual structures outside historic districts. The 2570 buildings, as well as other structures, archeological sites, located outside historic areas also need protection. This requires designating them, and requiring that proposals to alter or demolish them are reviewed by planning boards or historic district commissions. Since Massachusetts law does not provide for designation of individual structures, this should be done by using the MVC Act’s provision for Districts of Critical Planning Concern.

· Strategy B2-6: Make greater use of federal historic tax credits and other incentives: We should list more historic buildings and areas on the National Register of Historic Places to make them eligible for Federal Historic Tax Credits, informing owners of the availability of these credits at time of purchase or when inquiries about building permits are made. There has been extraordinary success in using revolving funds for preservation, such as buying façade easements from willing owners, leaving them freedom to do what they want in the parts not visible from the public way.

Strategy B2-7: Set up an advocacy organization promoting historic preservation and the quality of the built environment. There are several organizations that advocate for the Island’s natural environment, but none for the built environment, which is somewhat surprising given the richness of the Vineyard’s historic buildings and neighborhoods, and the general importance of building design to the Island’s character. The Preservation Trust’s mandate is to manage the historic properties it owns rather than advocate; the Martha's Vineyard Museum manages its collection and is a historic society rather than a preservation organization. An Island-wide advocacy organization could work to promote preservation of historic buildings and neighborhoods, cultural landscapes, archeology, and good quality building design. It could be made up of architects, historians, and interested citizens.

Built Environment 3.2: Community Character

2009-07-27T21:48:00.000-04:00

This section looks at the visual and other impacts of building in the 95% of the Island outside Historic Areas or Traditional Neighborhoods.

Here, there is still a desire to ensure that buildings generally harmonize with their neighborhoods or natural contexts, and that their negative impacts on Island character and on abutters are minimized. This is especially important as seen from major public roads and vistas, and from public waters – ponds and the ocean. For example, presently, about 540 buildings could be erected only slightly set back from the Island’s scenic roads, and there is nothing to prevent owners of these, or existing, buildings to remove the vegetation that currently lines these rural roads; the result would totally transform the country part of the Island into what would appear to be a densely built suburb. Also of great concern is the construction of new buildings that are so large that they totally overwhelm their neighborhood.

This can be addressed by ensuring that new construction is compatible with the character of neighborhoods, roadscapes, and the Vineyard as a whole. In many natural areas, this often means limiting the visual presence of new development. At the same time, the flexibility and creativity of owners and project designers should not be unnecessarily inhibited.

We want to avoid a free-for-all where inappropriate new construction is allowed to undermine Island character and to negatively impact quality of life and property values. But we also want to avoid an excessively bureaucratic approach requiring individual review of all projects, or an excessively restrictive approach that squelches creativity, such as Nantucket’s requirement that even buildings in new subdivisions must exactly follow historic design details right down to the number of window panes.

So it is proposed that the community take a two-pronged approach:

· Use a system of individual project review for the relatively small number of projects that are more critical because of their location – especially those highly visible from major roads or public waters – or some other factor, such as size.

· For other areas and projects, use a combination of zoning to ensure that the basic parameters of new buildings are appropriate, and education to make owners aware of other considerations about site layout, building design and landscaping (see Strategy 3.0-1).

House Size: So-called “trophy homes” or “McMansions” are the poster child for concerns about the changing Vineyard. Many people expressed concern about the visual impact of large new homes, their energy and water use, as well as the traffic and loss of open space they generate. The number of large houses is certainly increasing, with the percentage of houses with more than 4000 s.f. of living area before and after 1990 increasing from 3% to 5% in Tisbury, and from 8% to 19% in Chilmark. It must be remembered, however, that the vast majority of new houses are still smaller than 4000 s.f. and many impacts are similar no matter how large a house is. In some cases, it might be preferable to have one large house on thirty acres in an environmentally sensitive area, than to build ten medium-sized houses along with ten guesthouses, ten garages, and multiple swimming pools and tennis courts.

Objective B3: Protect general community character by ensuring that buildings fit into their context – especially as seen from public places such as roads and public waters – while allowing creativity and flexibility.

Strategy B3-1: Set up project review processes along Scenic Roads and Public Waters Viewsheds. The first step is to identify and designate Visually Critical Areas. For Scenic Roads, the viewshed along the Island’s main roads includes a depth of 100’ in wooded areas, the visual extent of open landscapes (e.g. fields, low vegetation found in areas such as Moshup Trail and Cape Pogue), as well as scenic vistas from public spaces. The Public Waters Viewsheds include areas clearly visible from 100’ offshore in coastal ponds and the ocean. The MVC and/or towns should establish a project approval process for projects in these areas (MVC review, special permit, and/or site plan review as discussed in section 10 of this Plan). Projects that are clearly demonstrated to have limited impact – say by maintaining a 50’ permanent no-cut zone between it and a Scenic Road, by keeping fencing low and open, or by being visually narrower than a threshold for each coastal area – could be exempted from review. Larger buildings could be permitted, but would be reviewed to ensure that their impact was minimized. Two existing Districts of Critical · Planning Concern – the Island Road District and the Coastal District – could provide the legal framework to allow towns to adopt the necessary regulations.

Strategy B3-2: Set up a project review process for high-impact buildings based on size or other criteria. A design review process for high-impact buildings such as those larger than a specific size would help ensure that new or enlarged buildings are properly reviewed, given their potentially greater impact. The threshold could vary by neighborhood. For denser neighborhoods, it could apply to all buildings whose floor space was, say, more than 25% greater than the average for the neighborhood. In rural areas, it could require review of any project greater than, say, 5000 square feet. The trigger could also be based on project density, so that larger projects on larger lots would not be reviewed. Projects could be exempted if they met objective criteria dealing with potential areas of concern, such as ensuring adequate wastewater treatment, limiting energy consumption and furniture, and signage – would ensure that decisions are coordinated and reinforce the particular character of each town.

Strategy B3-6: Implement design excellence in public and utility buildings and facilities: Some of the most visually minimizing visual impact. The process could involve requiring a special permit from a town board for projects with local impact, and MVC review for more significant projects.

· Strategy B3-3: Revise zoning requirements in neighborhoods to conform to existing character. For much of the Island, even outside Historic Areas and Traditional Neighborhoods, the zoning bears little relation to the actual pattern of building in an area. Large areas, even whole towns have the same minimum setbacks and maximum building heights, adopted in the 1970s and based on standard formulae used across America. Until recently, this was not so much of a problem since people erected buildings much smaller than the maximum permitted in zoning regulations. However, the high current property values, changing lifestyles, and the fact that we are running out of vacant land are increasingly leading people to build right up to the maximum permitted in zoning. For example, traditionally, virtually every buildings on the Island had a steeply sloping roof. However today, someone trying to maximize the floor space within a 35-foot height limit is tempted to propose a bulky building with a flat roof. Zoning dimensional regulations (setbacks, building heights, density, etc.) in neighborhoods should be revised to bring them into general conformity with the existing pattern, thereby preventing the most inappropriate new development. Also, we should limit large parking areas in front of buildings.

· Strategy B3-4: Set up municipal tree-planting programs: Each town has a tree warden responsible for public shade trees (pruning, removal of damaged trees, planting). The Aquinnah DCPC also gives the tree warden review powers for clearing, cutting, pruning, and topping of ground cover shrubs and trees on public and private land. It is recommended that other towns follow suit, at least for major trees on or close to the pubic way. A related effort is to set up municipal street tree planting programs to plant and maintain trees along public roads. Those responsible for this program could also offer advice and assistance (e.g. access to plant stock) to help people increase vegetation in front of buildings and fences, in Visually Critical Areas.

Strategy B3-5: Plan and implement improvements to the “public realm”: An important factor in determining the character of a community is the design of its public realm, namely the publicly owned streets, sidewalks, rights-of-ways, parks and other publicly accessible open spaces, as well as its public and civic buildings and facilities. Adopting an integrated plan for the design of these spaces – including street lighting, street problematic buildings or properties on the Island belong to towns or to utilities such as NStar or Verizon. These organizations should provide leadership by seeking the highest building and landscape design quality when planning new facilities. They should also analyze all existing facilities to identify improvements.

Built Environment 3.3: Green Building

2009-07-27T21:47:00.000-04:00

The whole world is recognizing that we need a major shift in how we deal with energy and the environment. Given the Island’s particular transportation constraints, it is especially important to increase the efficiency with which our buildings use resources — energy, water, and materials — while reducing building impacts on human health and the environment. This can be done through better siting, design, construction, operation, maintenance, and removal — the complete building life cycle. We should also be concerned about other building impacts on its surrounding area, such as light pollution and noise, and should optimize the impacts of renewable energy projects by looking at their impact on scenic values and historic resources.

Though there is great interest in green building on the Vineyard, there are presently no regulations or incentives to actually make it happen. In addition to energy-related issues (see section 4: Energy and Waste) there is a wide variety of other things we could do, such as minimizing demolition of existing buildings or scrapping of building materials, using environmentally sound building practices, using green building materials (reused, reusable, non-toxic), and ensuring the highest indoor air quality.

Objective B4: Encourage use of environmentally sound building “green-building” techniques and minimize the negative environmental impacts of building and human habitation.

· Strategy B4-1: Set energy/green-building standards for new construction and major renovations. We should require higher basic energy standards for new construction and major renovations (such as Energy Star Plus certification, the Commonwealth’s anticipated “stretch” building code, or a custom code for the Island such as VineyardBuild). We could require LEED certification for major projects and, as it becomes more affordable and accessible, require it for all building projects, possibly subsidizing the cost by non-profit organizations and year-round homes. The MVC has already adopted such a policy for projects subject to Commission review.

Strategy B4-2: Set up a program to encourage energy/green-building standards for existing buildings. Owners should be encouraged to incorporate energy efficiency and green building techniques in their buildings, especially when they are carrying out other renovation or expansion projects. The Vineyard Energy Project and town energy committees’ efforts in this regard could be expanded to include other green building issues. This can be done through education and technical assistance, which can provide advice about possible energy savings and the other advantages of · environmental building design, and can help with access to materials, products, and expertise. Just the decision to preserve an existing structure rather than demolish and replace it is an environmentally friendly choice, compared to demolition and new construction.

Strategy B4-3 Ensure that renewable energy facilities are compatible with historic and community character. The current energy crisis will likely lead to the proliferation of renewable energy facilities such as wind turbines and solar panels. A challenge is balancing energy and green building objectives, with other objectives such as scenic values and historic preservation. Examples include the impact of wind turbines on neighborhoods and scenic vistas, or the installation of highly visible solar panels on historic buildings. Based on the recommendations above, there would be a project review process in historic areas and traditional neighborhoods, and along scenic roads, to ensure that impacts are minimized by using efficiency measures first and by siting turbines or solar panels where they are less visible. Outside those areas, regulations should be combined with a project reviews for larger wind turbines and arrays of solar panels, to minimize their visual impact, and to ensure that those projects that do have a significant impact on the public or abutters, are warranted. For example, the Wind Energy Facilities Siting Plan (see section 4.) should, minimize visual and noise impacts especially from public places. When renewable energy facilities that compromise other objectives must be installed, it is desirable that the benefits accrue to those who will be negatively impacted; for example, those who see large, community wind turbines could get reduced and stabilized rates.

· Strategy B4-4: Manage building construction processes. A construction process can be very disruptive of a neighborhood, especially for large projects that extend over several years, for projects with nearby abutters, and for projects where the only access is a narrow, shared road. As part of the project review process (special permits, site plan review, and MVC DRI review), applicants for potentially problematic projects should be required to submit and follow a Construction Management Report that outlines how impacts would be minimized.

Objective B5: Minimize the general ongoing environmental impacts of human habitation on its context.

Many broad impacts – such as light, noise, and chemical use – emanate from the presence of human habitation in a community. These impacts don’t respect property lines and are becoming increasingly problematic as we concentrate development. Impacts can be on immediate abutters or on a larger neighborhood. People living close together are particularly affected by stray lighting, noisy machinery, and the use of pesticides on neighbors’ properties.

· Strategy B5-1: Require dark sky compliant lighting. Poorly designed outdoor lighting shines on abutting properties, causes glare that can be a safety hazard for drivers and can interfere with navigation in Island harbors, and creates a sky glow that can block out the view of stars. The fact that the Vineyard is surrounded by miles of unlit ocean means that by controlling lighting on-Island, we can be especially successful in reestablishing a dark sky over the Island. Dark-sky compliant lighting regulations require that lights be fully shielded to only shine down, be glare-free, use correct lighting levels, and are only used when needed (e.g. during business hours and motion-activated security lighting for commercial buildings). This could be accompanied by upgrades to public buildings (which are some of the worst offenders) as showcases, a public information campaign publically acknowledging good examples, encouraging lighting review to be included in subdivision covenants, and privately approaching owners of problematic properties.

· Strategy B5-2: Limit the use of toxins. Towns should explore the possibility of regulations on the use of pesticides and other chemicals used in landscaping should be explored, especially in the most problematic areas such as sensitive watersheds, significant habitat, and dense neighborhoods.

· Strategy B5-3: Limit nuisances. Regulations and enforcement procedures dealing with smoke and odor, such as from outdoor wood stoves, as well as the impact of noise from construction, landscaping work, and home businesses should be reviewed and improved if possible.

· Strategy B5-4: Curtail use of two-stroke engines. Two-stroke engines are especially polluting (and a common source or noise complaints). Promote use of electrical equipment when available, such as leaf blowers, weed trimmers and lawnmowers.

Built Environment 3.4: Redevelop Opportunity Areas

2009-07-27T21:46:00.000-04:00

There are a few areas of the Island where there could be substantial change over the next generation, which could substantially and positively modify their character. These areas include landfills, disturbed areas, and areas developed in the past thirty years as single-use, car-oriented commercial areas dominated by large parking lots and outdoor storage, such as the Upper State Road / Park-and-Ride area in Tisbury, the Upper Main Street / Triangle in Edgartown, and the West Tisbury Business District. In the longer term, the Goodale Pit might be redeveloped.

These areas give us the opportunity to concentrate mixed use, compact development as an alternative to sprawling, car-oriented growth in more environmentally sensitive areas. Increased density could be tied into reduction in density in rural areas, and/or be reserved for affordable or elderly housing.

The redevelopment of these areas could provide an opportunity to pursue two principles. There could be infill development based on the principles of Traditional Neighborhood Development, namely neighborhood design that accommodates a mix of residential and commercial uses within in a compact walkable area using traditional town-planning principles. These include: a range of housing types; a network of well-connected streets and blocks; humane public spaces; and amenities such as stores, schools, and places of worship within walking distance of residences. At the same time, these areas could be transformed into 21^st-century neighborhoods incorporating leading edge techniques for renewable energy, green building, communications (fiber optics, broadband internet), new modes of transportation, and waste management.

These areas could be good locations for affordable housing, in that they could have more compact development, are generally close to transit, and the land might be less expensive.

Objective B6: Redevelop “opportunity areas” – presently problematic areas – to improve the quality of the physical environment, to make them work more efficiently, and to incorporate compact mixed-use, development.

· Strategy B6-1: Outline redevelopment programs urban design plans for each Opportunity Area. The first step for each area is to determine the basic uses and concept. Then, an urban design plan should be prepared, delineating the public-private realm, proposing the main public improvements and the main parameters for future private development (massing, relation to street, materials, etc.) A challenge will be accommodating parking for existing and new uses.

· Strategy B6-2: Revise zoning regulations in Opportunity Areas: It will likely be necessary to revise zoning regulations to conform to the area plan. This could involve the use the Commonwealth’s 40R provision allowing communities to create overlay zoning districts to promote housing production and smart growth development. It might be desirable to adopt a system of pre-permitting or streamlined permitting to speed up the issuance of building permits for conforming projects.

· Strategy B6-3: Make public improvements in Opportunity Areas: It might be necessary to make public improvements to the areas, such as putting in or improving roads, bike paths, sidewalks/trails, open spaces, street trees, etc.

· Strategy B6-4: Encourage development in Opportunity Areas: The towns could actively encourage private development within these areas. In some cases, towns might want to facilitate development by helping with land assembly or by entering into public-private agreements.

Energy & Waste 4.0: Introduction

2009-07-27T21:40:00.000-04:00

The management of energy and of waste is essential for supporting human activity on the Vineyard. We take for granted that we’ll have plenty of energy and that someone will take care of our trash, garbage, and human waste. Rising fuel costs and increasing environmental concerns are making us more aware of the high costs and unsustainability of how we currently deal with these resources, bringing virtually all our energy to the Island, and transporting virtually all of our waste away. These two areas offer huge potential for radical transformations of how we manage these resources to put in place sustainable practices that will also bolster local economic activity.

Energy: As of 2005, the Vineyard used approximately 4.3 trillion BTUs of energy annually (equivalent to 757,000 barrels of oil, or three quarters of a 1000’-long supertanker). We use about 30% of this energy for heating and cooling our buildings, 33% for electricity for lighting, appliances, machinery, and 37% for transportation. Our primary energy fuels are oil, propane, and gasoline, as well as electricity generated primarily from the source fuels (in order of magnitude) natural gas, nuclear, coal, and oil. Most of the cordwood burned for heat comes from off island. The generation of electricity on-Island from small wind turbines and various solar systems does not yet produce a meaningful percentage of our energy needs.

There are several reasons to want to change the current system of providing energy to the Vineyard community.

· With respect to cost, the Vineyard has a large and steadily increasing annual energy bill (more than $64 million in 2005). Our energy costs are among the highest in the United States. Since more than 99% of our energy is produced off-Island, these expenditures leave our local economy. Both the Vineyard’s year-round community and visitor-based economy are particularly sensitive to high energy costs and disruptions to the energy supply.

· With respect to the environment, fossil fuels are our major source of energy. There is general scientific agreement that burning fossil fuels produces carbon dioxide that is influencing the earth’s atmosphere and contributing to rapid climate change. Burning these fuels results in air and water pollution and emissions, which endanger health and contribute to climate change. Annual carbon dioxide emissions attributable to the Vineyard were 329,000 tons in 2003 and will rise to 457,000 tons by 2050 if we take no new action. The Vineyard is particularly vulnerable to effects of climate change such as: rising sea levels, more frequent and severe weather, and health risks from insect-borne diseases. Importing our electricity from distant power plants means that a substantial amount of power is wasted in the conversion of source fuels into electricity and in transmission losses; it takes about three units of energy at the plant to produce one unit on the Vineyard.

· With respect to reliability, foreign fuel sources are increasingly insecure and unstable and may subject the community to supply shortages and price fluctuations beyond our control. The fact that we have to bring energy to our shores results in higher risks. Fuels are shipped to the Island by ferry or barge, subjecting the Vineyard to shipping-related issues. Electricity is brought to the Island by four 23.2 kilovolt underwater cables that are vulnerable, hard to repair, and the Vineyard’s 50-megawatt peak electricity usage level is fast approaching their 62.5 megawatts capacity; the cost of additional cables will be high and will be borne by all.

Many communities in the U.S. and elsewhere are well ahead of us in embracing new technologies to change their dependence upon fossil fuels, and can serve as models for Martha’s Vineyard. Also, the Vineyard’s abundant resource of wind energy gives us options not available to most other communities.

Waste: The volume of waste the Vineyard disposes of is also an energy intensive and, thus, costly operation. Currently we ship 40,000 tons of trash off island each year, accounting for 15% of the Steamship Authority’s freight traffic annually, or one in seven freight trips. Our generation of waste is increasing much faster than our year-round population growth. If we look at waste as a resource, we might address multiple issues: we import compost at great expense, while shipping off sewage sludge and organic materials we could use to make our own fertilizer and compost. Wiser use of what we now discard as waste could reclaim useable resources, reduce waste transportation costs, create new economic opportunities, and even produce energy.

In relation to the Island Plan’s goal of making the Vineyard a sustainable island, this section outlines a way to make the Vineyard largely energy neutral by 2050, essentially by using efficiency measures to reduce overall energy consumption by 50%, and then generating this energy from renewable sources such as wind turbines. Achieving these ambitious targets presents complex challenges that would take a significant commitment to deal with, but if the community chooses to do this, it is within our reach.

Energy “Self-Sufficiency”

The Vineyard could be energy “self-sufficient” – in the sense of producing an equivalent amount of energy to what we consume – and even a net producer of renewable energy, thanks mainly to the area’s strong and consistent winds. We would want to remain connected to the nation’s electric grid, so that at some times, excess energy can go into the grid, while at other times, we draw more than we generate. We could not only produce the equivalent of our electrical use, but could produce enough electricity to offset the greenhouse gas emissions from our continued reliance on fossil fuels for mostly transportation-related uses.

By 2050 with current growth trends, the Island Plan estimates that energy use would grow from 4.3 trillion BTUs to 5.6 trillion BTUs (based on population growth and reflecting 20% reduction in per capita energy use based upon current industry trends and emerging technologies). However, with the aggressive efficiency measures outlined in the Island Plan, we could reduce our overall energy consumption by more than half (reducing per capita use by 80%) consuming just 2.7 trillion BTUs.

Producing this amount of energy could theoretically be done in any of the following ways:

· 47 utility-scale (6 mw, 40-story tall) wind turbines at a cost of about $777 million (all cost figures are approximate orders of magnitude based on 2007 figures), or

· 28,036 residential-scale (10 kw) wind turbines at about $1,402 million, or

· 93,400 residential-scale solar panel installations at about $1,555 million, or

· 850 acres of utility-scale solar panel arrays at about $1,912 million.

We will likely continue to get our energy from a variety of sources, but this very preliminary estimate suggests that utility-scale wind is by far the most cost effective, and it is probably the only option that could be physically accommodated, namely in an off-shore wind farm in Vineyard waters.

Fundamental to achieving the energy objectives outlined in this section is to achieve a consensus on effective strategies among major stakeholders. This involves bringing together the energy establishment – utility companies, Cape Light Compact, fuel transporters, wholesalers and retailers – to build consensus for cohesive, integrated strategies.

Objective E1: Organize to deal effectively with energy issues.

Common to all the energy issues discussed in this section is the need for well thought-out and integrated mechanisms to organize, educate, fund and lobby.

· Strategy E1-1: Develop organizational infrastructure to sustain energy efficiency and generation initiatives. The challenges to our community for effectively addressing the demands, technologies and costs for the production, management of energy will require multiple initiatives and strategies. While individual towns and the private sector may perform some of this, the larger initiatives that promise the most impact in improving efficiencies, changing user behavior, or developing our Vineyard-grown resource will require a high level of coordination among the towns to produce a complementary, if not unified, effort to bring about positive change. A few examples of such Island-wide activities that could fall under one or more entities are:

- Receive grants, rate surplus and tax revenue, evaluate proposals and administer funds; authorize bonding authority to finance larger public energy projects

- Provide technical outreach and assistance to identify opportunities and evaluate technologies, train construction community and building inspectors in energy efficiency construction techniques, offer and coordinate incentives such as tax credits, rebates, grants and low interest loans, design and operate an energy audit-upon-sale program, train and supervise competent energy auditing teams.

- Provide technical support for existing building inspectors, with enforcement powers to certify the energy efficiency of construction. Presently, each town has its own building inspector. Until towns could justify their own individual energy inspectors, the position of an Island-wide Energy Building Inspector could be created to check for compliance and ensure that techniques are being applied correctly.

- Establish a revolving fund allowing financing of energy projects.

Energy & Waste 4.1: Energy Efficiency

2009-07-27T14:53:00.008-04:00

Energy efficiency efforts may be the least exciting but are also the simplest and least expensive way to improve our energy situation. In the oil crisis of the 1970’s, President Carter asked the American people to put on a sweater and turn down the thermostat. That is an example of energy conservation. Today, technological advances offer us the opportunity to provide the equivalent services using smaller amounts of energy. Compact fluorescents provide the same amount of light using one-third the amount of energy. This is an example of energy efficiency.

Readily available technology can make dramatic improvements in energy efficiency both cost effective and reliable. Examples include fluorescent lighting, super-insulation, high performance windows, Energy Star appliances, and high efficiency heating systems. Retrofit projects can save up to 50% of energy use. Our targets for 2050 include 50% improvement from efficiency gains using currently known efficiency techniques, with the anticipation that even greater opportunities will avail themselves in the future.

Existing technologies, our low-density settlement pattern, and our automobile-dependent society make it most challenging to substantially reduce energy and carbon emissions in transportation, which is one third of the Island’s energy consumption. Total motor vehicle miles traveled has been increasing by approximately 2% per year, twice the population growth rate and SSA traffic has grown in the shoulder and off-seasons (at least until the current economic crisis). The large home services and construction sectors require a lot of travel throughout the Island.

The Island communities have taken steps to reduce traffic congestion by looking at particularly congested locations – plans for a roundabout at the former blinker intersection in Oak Bluffs and a connector road between Edgartown Vineyard Haven Road and Upper State Road in Tisbury – and by providing attractive alternatives to using the automobile, such as year-round bus transit service integrated with park-and-ride lots, expanded sidewalk and bike path networks. Nevertheless, the dispersed physical development of the Vineyard makes it likely that personal motor vehicles will remain our predominant means of transportation even fifty years from now.

If we are to make a significant reduction in the amount of the energy that transportation consumes and the destructive waste it emits, we will need a multi-pronged approach to shift personal vehicle miles to transit or non-motorized personal travel (walk and bike), to improve fuel consumption rates of vehicles, and transition to cleaner burning or “green” fuels that might be generated on-Island. In the long term, planning strategies should focus development in more compact, walkable towns and villages.

Finding ways to reduce vehicle miles traveled serves the Island in a number of ways. All of the Vineyard's fuel is imported by ferry or barge and reducing the amount needed will serve us if scarcities of gasoline should occur. The Vineyard's summer traffic and congestion issues result in lines of idling cars waiting to get into or through town centers, which contributes to local air pollution. Transportation is the most significant way that people on the Vineyard contribute to climate change. Section 9, Transportation, outlines a series of measures aimed at reducing the amount of car usage, including making public transit more compelling to use and improving facilities for bicycles and pedestrians.

Objective E2: Reduce the amount of energy used in buildings.

In 2005, the approximately 15,000 housing units (including guest houses and apartments) and non-residential buildings accounted for 58% of the energy used on the Vineyard. Energy use in buildings can be reduced by requiring higher efficiency new construction, improving the energy performance of existing buildings, and setting up a rate structure that encourages people to use less energy.

· Strategy E2-1: Adopt a Vineyard Energy Code requiring new construction to be more energy efficient. It is now feasible to build much more efficiently, thereby reducing owners’ annual heating and cooling costs. Many states have much stronger energy standards in their building codes than Massachusetts. In 2008, the Commonwealth’s Green Communities Act put in place measures enabling localities to enact such local energy codes and it is drafting a “stretch” energy code for possible adoption by municipalities. The Vineyard should amend the energy portion of the Building Code to phase in improved energy performance, starting with exceeding the current code by 15% (equivalent to the Energy Star rating) in 2010, requiring 50% greater energy performance in 2015, and increasing performance targets every 5 years so that by 2030, new buildings will be 90% more efficient than today’s requirements. These performance standards should give credit for using renewable energy sources and could include offsetting part of the requirement with mitigation fees that would go into a revolving fund to pay for other energy improvements in the community.

· Strategy E2-2: Institute energy audits and upgrades upon residential property sales and for all commercial buildings. Our old buildings are usually the least energy efficient. Once a Vineyard Energy Code is in place, we should set up a system requiring that an energy audit be conducted when a property is sold, similar to mandatory Title 5 septic inspections. The audit could be accompanied by expert advice in reducing energy needs for lighting, refrigeration, ventilation, and air conditioning. Energy upgrades could be encouraged, or even required for efficiency measures with less than a 10-year simple payback, perhaps assisted with a revolving fund. Conversions to non-greenhouse-gas-emitting energy sources would be encouraged and rewarded.

- Residential audits would be required upon the home sale, allowing sellers and buyers to negotiate prices or possibly triggering required upgrades by the seller for efficiency measures with a 10-year payback.

- Businesses audits would be required for buildings with annual energy bills of more than a given threshold, with mandatory implementation of efficiency measures with less than 10-year simple payback.

· Strategy E2-3: Create a revolving fund for energy improvements – the Island Energy Fund. Property owners who undertake energy efficiency improvements – especially those with less than a 10-year payback identified in their energy audit – could get low-interest loans from a revolving fund. Loans for public and affordable housing projects could be interest free. The fund could be financed by floating bonds, from mitigation fees for building unable to meet their full energy requirements, and with arrangements with energy suppliers to pay back implementation costs from savings in energy bills (already available to large customers under area-wide agreements or Utility Energy Savings Contracts). (Aspen, Colorado has had such a program for many years, and Vachon Island in Washington State is instituting energy fees to support a revolving loan fund for energy improvement programs.)

· Strategy E2-4: Implement energy pricing structures that encourage energy efficiency. The average house size has increased considerably on the Vineyard, and seasonal homes are increasingly heated year-round, so even with more efficient building, energy consumption can continue to rise. This could lead energy price increases or supply disruptions that will affect the whole community. Communities across the nation have shown that inverted pricing – the more you buy, the higher the unit price – is an effective way of changing behavior, allowing efficient users to benefit from rates subsidized by inefficient users. Setting up an inclining block rate program would require working with power supplier, fuel distributors and state agencies. The inclining block methodology was applied successfully to water rates in California during the 1990’s drought and remains in place at many public and private water agencies. The program could be designed to be revenue-neutral, or net proceeds to go to the Island Energy Fund for reinvestment in efficiency and renewable generation projects.

· Strategy E2-5: Become an incandescent-free island. Replacing incandescent light bulbs with efficient compact fluorescents (CFL) or other efficient bulbs is the simplest energy-efficiency measure and one from which homeowners most immediately see reduced monthly electricity costs. Annual savings average about $100 per household. Australia is banning the sale of incandescent bulbs by 2010 and Canada by 2012. If every Islander exchanged 15 incandescent bulbs for more efficient bulbs, the Island’s annual electrical consumption would decline by 7%. A program promoting this exchange could involve trained door-to-door personnel equipped to make on-the-spot change outs, calls on businesses to explain efficient alternative lighting and arrange incentives for efficiency measures.

· Strategy E2-6: Require new pools to be solar-heated. Solar pool heating has very quick payback and offers significant fuel savings. A simple and effective short-term efficiency measure would be to mandate that any new heated pool be accompanied by passive or active solar pool heating adequate to meet the pool’s needs, as well as requiring that all pool and hot tub covers be insulated.

· Strategy E2-7: Convert to more energy efficient building HVAC systems. As surplus renewable electric energy becomes available, establish incentives and furnish expertise for conversion of building heating/cooling/hot water systems to geothermal heat pumps.

· Strategy E2-8: Publicize our energy challenges and opportunities for addressing them. Changing attitudes and behavior is the most challenging part of this work. For generations, energy has been an inexpensive commodity and has been taken for granted. We need to foster greater understanding of the critical role that energy plays in our lives and the energy challenge before us. Our efforts will be more successful if they emphasize the benefits of choice and comparability of options rather than suggesting that being efficient involves self-sacrifice or “doing without”. If we are to succeed at creating an energy paradigm shift, we need to have the commitment of Islanders of all ages – essentially a mass movement. Educating and motivating people about the energy choices the Vineyard faces could involve: developing a social marketing program to popularize energy awareness; stepping up energy education programs in schools to educate future consumers; illustrating operational costs/benefits of energy efficiency implementation; and running a program to raise awareness about carbon footprints and how to reduce them.

Objective E3: Use available technologies to reduce the amount of gasoline used per vehicle mile traveled.

Hybrid vehicles, soon to be available plug-in hybrids, and all-electric vehicles, offer a near-term solution to reducing the Island's automobile fuel needs. With fuel efficiencies double or more than today’s average vehicle, they offer a way for Islanders to continue to use their vehicles as they wish, while saving on the amount of gasoline that we need to import to the Island. In addition, hybrids and other efficient vehicles offer the easiest transportation solution to reducing our contribution to greenhouse gas emissions and climate change. The Vineyard holds particular promise for alternative-powered automobiles since some concerns about these vehicles – such as the duration of battery charges between charging stations, the inability to accelerate rapidly, and the reduced collision resistance of lighter vehicles – are less problematic here, since Island trip distances are relatively short and there are no speed limits over 45 mph.

In the long-term, replacing the use of combustion engines with other available technologies such as electric motors, hydrogen-powered fuel cells or vehicles designed to store power for the Island, in combination with locally generated energy from renewable sources, will allow us to work towards the goal of zero emissions for the Island's transportation sector.

· Strategy E3-1: Promote use of hybrid and other energy-efficient vehicles. If we all drove hybrid vehicles, we’d reduce gasoline consumption in automobiles by 50%. If, in a decade from now, we all drive the plug-in hybrids that will then be available, we’d reduce gas consumption by 75%. Measures to encourage use of fuel-efficient vehicles include having towns and other public agencies buy them, and/or requiring that taxis and a proportion of car rentals be fuel-efficient. Individuals could be encouraged to make their next car a hybrid or other fuel-efficient vehicle with an information campaign, and with incentives such as priority ferry reservations and better parking spaces.

Objective E3: Improve Island air quality related to transportation.

Burning fossil fuels pollutes our air. Motor boats, lawn equipment, idling vehicles, all impact the Vineyard’s air quality. Diesel fuel is one of the contributors to particulate in the air that is responsible for the rise of asthma in the United States. The Island has a number of vehicle types that are diesel-powered: the ferries; most of the buses used for public transit, schools and tourism; and vehicles and equipment used in construction, landscaping and agriculture.

· Strategy E3-1: Use available technologies to lessen impact diesel fuel use on the Island. Phase in requirements for all island diesel powered vehicles to use clean fuel alternatives: better grades of diesel, biodiesel, electric. Conduct a pilot project for island school buses and/or for ferry buses to demonstrate the viability of clean fuel alternatives to use of diesel fuels such as adding a percentage of biodiesel to the ferry's fuel mix.

· Strategy E3-2: Eliminate unnecessary vehicle idling. Institute an anti-idling program based on education and enforcement.