Oak Bluffs Innkeeper Challenges Commission Decision in Court

By IAN FEIN

A Dukes County superior court judge yesterday heard arguments in a
one-day trial that explored the limits of commercial expansion in an
eclectic residential neighborhood of Oak Bluffs.

Town resident Jack E. Robinson Sr. is challenging the Martha's
Vineyard Commission denial of a proposed 10-bedroom expansion to his inn
and tennis center on New York avenue. The commission reviewed the
project in the summer of 2005 as a development of regional impact (DRI).

An attorney for Mr. Robinson argued in court yesterday that the
commission decision was arbitrary and unsupported by evidence, while
attorneys for the regional planning agency countered that the proposed
expansion was not appropriate for the location.

"When looking at all of the factors, the probable benefits of
this project outweigh the probable detriments," Brant Rock
attorney Michael Savage, who represents Mr. Robinson in the case, said
during his closing argument yesterday afternoon.

"Today Mr. Robinson had the burden of proving that there was
no reasonable basis for the commission decision," said Boston
attorney Johanna Schneider, who represents the commission along with
fellow attorney Eric Wodlinger. "And he failed to do that."

The Hon. Judith Fabricant presided over the non-jury trial
yesterday, and said at the end that she intended to issue a decision
rather promptly. Mr. Robinson and commission executive director Mark
London were the sole witnesses to testify.

The case also marked only the second time in the history of the
commission that an appeal of a DRI decision went to a complete trial. No
decision by the regional planning agency has ever been overturned on its
merits.

A central question in the case is what level of commercial expansion
should be allowed along New York avenue - a residential
neighborhood at the fringe of the Oak Bluffs business district. In
addition to the Martha's Vineyard Resort and Racquet Club
currently operated by Mr. Robinson on his property, New York avenue is
home to approximately 15 other small businesses - including a real
estate company, gas station, bait shop, and bookstore.

Mr. Robinson in 2004 proposed a 19-room expansion to the 11 bedrooms
currently on his property, but after he was denied by the commission
that year, he returned with a 10-bedroom expansion plan. Commission
members in July 2005 said even the 10-bedroom expansion was out of scale
with other businesses in the area, and rejected that plan as well, in a
unanimous 9-0 vote.

The two projects are the only developments of regional impact (DRIs)
that the commission has denied in the last three and a half years.

The commission in its denial cited the 1998 Oak Bluffs master plan,
which called for commercial expansion to occur solely within existing
business districts, and not along New York avenue. The written decision
of the commission noted that Oak Bluffs is one of the few towns in the
commonwealth that has successfully resisted suburban-style business
strips by containing commercial development to the downtown area.

"You heard today the rational land use planning reasons why
Mr. Robinson's project was not appropriate for this
location," Ms. Schneider told Judge Fabricant in her closing
argument yesterday. "You heard about the problems of sprawl and
suburbanization, and the commission's role in protecting Oak
Bluffs from those things," she added.

Mr. Savage countered that the town master plan identified a primary
economic goal of making Oak Bluffs a family-oriented resort community,
and he recommended a policy of allowing a resurgence of grand Victorian
hotels.

"The Oak Bluffs master plan is not a hard-and-fast prohibition
against development," Mr. Savage said, "but rather concerned
what kind of development the town was looking for."

He also suggested that the plan identifies New York avenue as a good
site for bed and breakfast businesses, and noted that the town zoning
board of appeals, when it granted Mr. Robinson a special permit for his
original bed and breakfast in 1991, found that the location was
appropriate for the business, particularly because the area includes
other commercial ventures.

Judge Fabricant, who will preside over the rest of the superior
court session this month, noted early in the trial that she intended to
visit the Robinson property while on the Vineyard. Mr. Savage encouraged
her to do so.

"When you visit the site, you will see that it is very modest in
terms of land use," he said. "You will see why my
client's house and amenities - like the clay tennis courts
- make it a rather special place for people."

A former head of the Boston chapter of the NAACP, Mr. Robinson
testified yesterday that he decided to open his inn and tennis club in
the mid-1980s, when many African Americans were moving away from Oak
Bluffs because they could not afford a place to stay. The town has a
long history as a popular destination and haven for African Americans.

"As the black community began to disappear from the Island,
many people started to call me to see if I had rooms where they could
stay," said Mr. Robsinson, 79, who first came to the Island in the
1940s. "The hotels were not very minority friendly, so most of the
accommodations were in bed and breakfasts."

Mr. Robinson last fall also filed a complaint against the
Martha's Vineyard Commission with the state agency that enforces
the commonwealth's anti-discrimination laws, alleging that racism
played a role in the denials. The discrimination complaint is still
under investigation and separate from the superior court case.

Mr. Robinson yesterday also dropped the Oak Bluffs building
inspector as a party to the superior court case. He added the building
inspector as a defendant last spring, arguing that the former building
department secretary in early 2005 did not have the authority to send
the expansion project to the commission as a DRI.

But Mr. Savage at the outset of the trial yesterday filed a motion
to dismiss the building inspector from the case, and neither the town
nor commission objected to the motion.