Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Reform topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Oak Bluffs planning board hears public feedback on zoning warrant articles
Summary
At a Feb. 12 public hearing the Oak Bluffs Planning Board solicited public comment on multiple proposed warrant articles — including short-term rental limits, environmental performance standards, erosion-control measures and changes to accessory-use rules — and did not take votes, continuing deliberations to future meetings.
The Oak Bluffs Planning Board met virtually on Feb. 12 to collect public feedback on several proposed zoning warrant articles, including limits on short‑term rentals and new environmental and land‑clearing rules. Chair Mark Crossland said the Board would not vote on the articles that night and that the hearing’s purpose was to gather input.
Member Chris Chambers, who led the discussion of the package, said proposed Article 7.5 would restrict short‑term rentals to a weeks limit specified in the draft and remove a fixed fee amount so the Select Board can set the dollar amount later. Public commenter Jill Cheatham urged a higher fee, asked that the allowable weeks be extended to "6.5" and proposed a 26‑week cap.
The package includes a proposed revision to Section 5.4, "Environmental Performance Standards," that would place on applicants the burden of demonstrating compliance with by‑law environmental requirements. Nick DeRose told the Board he was concerned the Martha's Vineyard Commission's DRI review does not trigger all state environmental oversight and that the island’s sole‑source aquifer and wellhead protections are at risk. DeRose recommended adding a certification trigger and requiring assessment by a professional engineer and a Massachusetts licensed site professional to ensure required DEP permits are obtained.
On erosion control, Member Chambers said the draft 5.4.5 narrows current clearing allowances by adding definitions and would require a Special Permit to clear more land than specified, while preserving exceptions for state‑approved agricultural projects, hazardous‑tree removal and road clearing tied to ANR or subdivision approvals.
Chambers described proposed changes to accessory uses (Section 3.2), saying the draft combines subsections, classifies trailers as commercial vehicles, requires the applicant be the principal owner or controlling interest in a legal entity, limits operating hours and exterior storage for home‑based businesses, caps the floor area used for business activities and requires registration with the Town Clerk. He said the special‑permit granting authority would be shifted; in response to a question from Dana Mylott, Chambers confirmed the Zoning Board of Appeals would be the special‑permit authority under the revised language.
The Board also discussed a change to the use chart that would direct non‑exempt commercial agricultural uses to the Planning Board, not treat them as automatically by‑right. Dana Mylott offered historical context and said the conversation was a useful start, while Chambers emphasized the change targets commercial—not familial—agricultural activity.
The Board took no votes on any of the warrant articles and indicated the Zoning Reform Subcommittee will resume meetings next month to continue drafting and refinement.
The meeting record shows the Board approved the Jan. 22 minutes earlier in the session and adjourned at 6:25 p.m.
