Home / Archive / VOL. II NO. 18 09/15/2021 / Notes from the Planning Board (PB), September 7, Hybrid Meeting

If you would like to support Stockbridge Updates, send your contribution to Venmo @carole-owens-6 or mail PO Box 1072, Stockbridge, MA. 01262. We thank you for all you have done for the past five years. Now we are six. If you like this issue — pass it on.

Notes from the Planning Board (PB), September 7, Hybrid Meeting

Present:

  • Bill Vogt, Chair
  • Arie Rafferty, Vice Chair
  • Gary Pitney
  • Wayne Slosek
  • Nancy Socha

Present via Zoom:

  • Kate Fetcher
  • Carl Sprague
  1. Minutes from 8/17/2021 approved.
  2. 55 Interlaken Rd sign permit — Berkshire Country Day School — no one present for BCDS — postponed.
  3. Discussion of open points in NHRPZ draft bylaw continued. We urge those interested to watch Community Television South Berkshire (CTSB), judge for yourselves, and form your own opinion. Open conversations like these are wide ranging, and the meaning should not be lost.
    1. However certain moments stand out. For example, one PB member looked up from the draft and said, “I don’t agree with any of this”.
    2. Another member declared the way it is written is “ridiculously vague… I don’t understand any of this.”
    3. A third suggested it was “boiler plate” and possibly written for another community in MA.
    4. At prior meetings two other members said they did not think the bylaw was either good for Stockbridge or necessary.
  4. The Chair announced he did not approve of a house built with PB permission and approval. They discussed how that might have happened. The Chair thought PB could not refuse approval or only had a narrow window to disapprove. Fletcher suggested a training meeting perhaps with Town Counsel to clarify PB’s breadth and limits of authority.

Meeting adjourned

Editor’s Notes: 1. It appears the majority of members of PB do not like the consultant’s proposed bylaw. Perhaps this is the time for PB to pause and take a vote to determine if that is true and if they should continue to consider NHRPZ or stop. $80,000 has been requested for PB consultants — some already spent; some assigned to the NHRPZ consultant. If the majority does not wish to continue it would save taxpayers money and would save the time and effort of PB members. 2. Previously SU asked if NHRPZ creates more land accessible to the public than either R4 or R2? In this meeting the question was answered. No, none of the land conserved by NHRPZ is necessarily accessible to the public. c. All board, committee and commission members should be aware that those attending via Zoom can hear all conversations even when whispered. Voices are amplified. Conversations possibly meant to be private are heard and such conversations interfere with hearing the speaker.

Photo: Joan Gallos

Sign Up for 
Stockbridge Updates

Name

Past Issues

Archive of all stories