A civil trial that pits a group of developers against the Martha’s Vineyard Commission over its denial of a large subdivision plan in Edgartown two years ago continued Monday in Dukes County superior court.
Meeting House Way LLC is suing the commission over its 2020 decision to deny the plan to build 28 market-rate homes and 14 affordable townshouses on 54 acres off Meetinghouse Way.
Three of the developers took the stand on Friday and Monday, testifying about the multiple revisions that were made to the plan during the commission review.
David Blatt, a Boston real estate developer and Meeting House partner, spoke about genesis of the project. Describing himself as a longtime seasonal visitor, Mr. Blatt said he discovered the property when he was looking for a family home. He said he learned that Doug Anderson, a Utah-based developer and Meeting House partner, had put in a competing offer. Having worked together in the past, the two agreed to join forces, Mr. Blatt said. In 2017, along with other investors, they bought the undeveloped land.
“I put every dollar into the project I had . . . then we closed on it,” Mr. Blatt said.
Mr. Blatt said he had never done a development project on the Vineyard, and he combed through years of commission decisions to familiarize himself with the process. He said he looked at other subdivisions reviewed by the commission to come up with a proposal that could pass muster with the regional planning agency.
“[I tried] to really understand how they would evaluate a project like ours,” Mr. Blatt said. “I reached a conclusion that we could craft a reasonable project.”
Taking the stand on Monday, Mr. Anderson described an early version of the project, which called for creating 35 lots for homes that would be sold at market rate.
“We were promptly told that was not going to fly and we changed that substantially,” Mr. Anderson said.
Mr. Anderson also spoke about environmental considerations that went into the plan. After the property was flagged by the Massachusetts Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program as needing protection, the plan was reconfigured as a cluster plan in order to protect the rare imperial moth and minimize habitat fragmentation, Mr. Anderson said. He said in the final plan, 60 per cent of the land was to be kept as open space.
“We felt like we could do a really good job of enhancing and improving what was there by adding open space,” he said.
Mr. Anderson recalled his frustration near the end of the review process, when he thought the project was bound to fail. Satisfying the concerns of one commissioner meant adding problems for another, he said.
“We sensed that there was not any number that would work . . . I think the commission was trying to do the right things at all times,” Mr. Anderson said. “It just became apparent to me we were stuck in an infinite loop and it would never get approved.”
On Friday, Edward Champy, a Boston real estate developer and Meeting House partner, testified about the decision near the end of the review process to add affordable town houses to the project.
The change would have an impact on the business plan for the project, he said.
“It didn’t really matter if it worked, it mattered what the commission was telling us,” Mr. Champy said. “Our intention was to appease the MVC.”
The plaintiffs rested their case Monday, and attorneys for the commission began the defense portion of the case.
The Hon. Paul D. Wilson, an associate justice of the superior court, is presiding over the special court sitting. The trial is expected to run at least through tomorrow and could finish in Boston at a later date.
