Cape Cod and Unwanted development

[Art Allen]

 

 

 

Wellfleet's McMansion plot thickens

BRENT HAROLD          /       Tuesday, July 29, 2008      /          Cape Cod Times (Hyannis, MA)

OK, here we go, Wellfleet vs. McMansionization, Chapter 4. As you recall, in Chapter 1 new owners Mark and Barbara Blasch obtain a permit for tearing down the most house in town, the infamous Billboard House, and building one three times as large. This is seen as potentially just the start of a trend of mega-houses that could extend to hundreds of properties in the National Seashore, part of our town.

In Chapter 2, numerous parties appeal this permit to the ZBA. Passionate display on the part of most of those packing three nights of hearings against the proposed Blasch house for being detrimental to Seashore and town character.

In Chapter 3, the ZBA, running scared and/or finding no basis in law for championing a popular cause, bestows its blessing on Son of Billboard.

In Chapter 4... ? Chapter 4, it has been assumed, was being written by the planning board, charged by the selectmen back in the spring with overhauling the current bylaws, closing loopholes to make sure the first three chapters will not be repeated.

The Wellfleet Forum sponsored a meeting on July 21 to provide an update, a reading, as it were, of the planning board's work-in-progress on Chapter 4. As at the ZBA hearing, the room was packed, most of us prepared to view our planning board as heroes to lead us into a better, trophy-house-less future.

We were looking for a progress report. What we got looked a lot like a lack-of-progress report.

For an hour and a half we heard from scheduled experts from the National Seashore, Cape Cod Commission, and of course the planning board itself. Presenter after presenter made the case (again) that the loopholes allowing for out-of-scale development need to be closed, pronto. This was not a debate over whether the loopholes should be closed; the only question was how it was to be done.

A number of presenters seemed convinced that what works for Eastham, the town right next door whose bylaws sensibly mirror the Seashore guidelines (the ones that people erroneously thought for so long had legal standing), might work for our town as well.

Finally came the turn of the chairman of the planning board, and while he didn't exactly dispute the prevailing urgency, his most memorable comments were (in effect): Darn right I'm an advocate for rights of property owners. And: What works for Eastham might not apply here. We're more like Truro (the neighbor on the other side, the only town widely thought to be left by its bylaws more vulnerable to unwanted development than we are). And (more than once): Well, the question we're dealing with here is: How Big is Too Big?

It soon became clear that the only people in town who have difficulty with the concept of Too Big and the need for greater restrictions on mega- construction in the Seashore are certain members of the planning board. The sense one took away from that meeting is that, far from planning to protect us, the planning board is planning to leave us in the lurch.

But it's misleading to refer monolithically to the board. There is a struggle among the members. One new member made a most helpful contribution, defining Too Big and out-of-scale with a chart of existing house sizes. But given the personal views of the chairman and vice chair (a career developer who has been quoted as making the logical point that an owner who has paid his million plus for a site in the Seashore should not be expected to be satisfied with a modest house) the board has started looking like unlikely saviors in the anti-McMansion fight.

But this just in: Looks like there's a Chapter 5, or a rewrite of Chapter 1. At U.S. Rep. Delahunt's request, the Department of Interior is appealing the ZBA decision on the Blasch house.

And a Chapter 6: The board of selectmen, in response to the planning board's foot dragging, will apparently be coming up with its own restrictive bylaws to take to town meeting in the fall.

So things are looking up.