Glen plan could tap nearly all funds left

By Glenn DrohanPrint Story | Email Story
ADAMS — State planners are following its consultants’ recommendation to pursue a “low impact” environmental and recreational project at the Greylock Glen, sweetening the pot for potential developers by offering up to $3 million in matching funds for site improvements and infrastructure. Planners have also extended the deadline for requests for proposals (RFPs) from July 15 to Sept. 14 to allow anyone interested in the long-beleaguered 1,063-acre property at the eastern base of Mount Greylock to amend their proposals. The $3 million, if used, would tap virtually all Glen funds left in the original $8.5 million bond authorization from 1985, leaving roughly $330,000, according to the state Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR), which is pursuing the project with the Massachusetts Development Finance Agency. Failed development efforts over the last 19 years swallowed up most of the money, during fierce battles with environmental groups from throughout the county and state. The low impact development would cost about $7 million to build and yield annual operating profits of about $103,000, according to a business plan prepared last month by the consultants, C.H. Johnson Consulting Inc. and ConsultEcon of Chicago. It would include a nature center, a lodging facility of up to 100 beds, 10 rustic cabins, 75 tent sites, hiking and cross-country ski trails and require about 225 parking spaces. According to the DCR, the project could be phased into a “moderate impact” development, and the current master plan would not have to be changed. That plan allows two lodging facilities, which has drawn some fire from environmental groups, including the Massachusetts Environmental League of Boston, the local Save the Glen group and the Berkshire Natural Resources Council of Pittsfield. State officials have countered that the new master plan revised last year is the best yet for the Glen and represents a fair compromise balancing economic development with environmental concerns. The consultants concurred in their business report. According to the report, the “moderate impact” development could contain up to 150 beds of lodging, 125 tent sites, 20 recreational vehicle sites, 4,000 square feet of classroom space, 5,000 square feet of meeting space and 1,500 square feet of retail space, in addition to the nature center and trails. It would cost $12.1 million to build, require 500 parking spaces and yield $267,000 in annual revenues, according to the consultants. “A phased development which would grow to the ‘Moderate Impact Recreation Conservation Area’ is totally appropriate and fits within the parameters of the approved master plan and the RFP,” the DCR said in statements prepared in response to Advocate questions yesterday. “A phased development starting from the Low Impact Recreation Conservation Area and growing to the next level would provide greater economic benefit to the region without any additional expenditure of state funds.” The consultants said in the business plan that it is likely only nonprofit organizations would be interested in pursuing a development because of the relatively low potential for profit. For that reason, property tax revenues to the town are expected to be minimal. “The Outdoor Recreation and Environmental Center facility is designed to create a regional recreational and economic development area that is an integral part of the overall revitalization strategy for the town of Adams,” DCR officials said in their prepared statements. “The facility is envisioned as one that will be environmentally sensitive, appropriate in scale and innovative in its ability to be a catalyst to assist Adams and the Northern Berkshires achieve economic and social benefits.” The officials added, “The development will support the town of Adams’ ‘Trails and Treasures’ program, will attract new visitors to the town, increase the exposure of Adams as the place to go to for those who seek serenity, scenery, nature and outdoor adventure.” DCR Commissioner Katherine F. Abbott announced the updated RFP Monday. “By offering prospective developers greater financial flexibility, we look forward to receiving proposals for a facility that offers visitors and Adams residents alike a place to enjoy the splendid natural beauty of the Glen,” Abbott said State Rep. Daniel E. Bosley, D-North Adams, added, “I believe that this amendment to the RFP demonstrates the state’s strong commitment to seeing a successful project on the Greylock Glen. In addition, the time extension will help those who wish to partner in an effort to meet both the economic and environmental goals. Now it is up to all of us to roll up our sleeves and come up with a winning proposal that will benefit the town of Adams and all those who care about the Greylock Glen.” According to the DCR officials, “ The proponent selected will be one which delivers the most public benefits to the citizens of Adams, Northern Berkshires and the commonwealth.” They added, “The development will be good for the economy and the environment. These benefits will not only be taxes and employment but also benefits related to the provision of outdoor recreation opportunities, environmental education, economic development, resource protections and enhancement of the region’s image.”
If you would like to contribute information on this article, contact us at info@iberkshires.com.

Letter: Is the Select Board Listening to Dalton Voters?

Letter to the Editor

To the Editor:

A reasonable expectation by the people of a community is that their Select Board rises above personal preference and represents the collective interests of the community. On Tuesday night [Nov. 12], what occurred is reason for concern that might not be true in Dalton.

This all began when a Select Board member submitted his resignation effective Oct. 1 to the Town Clerk. Wishing to fill the vacated Select Board seat, in good faith I followed the state law, prepared a petition, and collected the required 200-plus signatures of which the Town Clerk certified 223. The Town Manager, who already had a copy of the Select Board member's resignation, was notified of the certified petitions the following day. All required steps had been completed.

Or had they? At the Oct. 9 Select Board meeting when Board members discussed the submitted petition, there was no mention about how they were informed of the petition or that they had not seen the resignation letter. Then a month later at the Nov. 12 Select Board meeting we learn that providing the resignation letter and certified petitions to the Town Manager was insufficient. However, by informing the Town Manager back in October the Select Board had been informed. Thus, the contentions raised at the Nov. 12 meeting by John Boyle seem like a thinly veiled attempt to delay a decision until the end of January deadline to have a special election has passed.

If this is happening with the Special Election, can we realistically hope that the present Board will listen to the call by residents to halt the rapid increases in spending and our taxes that have been occurring the last few years and pass a level-funded budget for next year, or to not harness the taxpayers in town with the majority of the cost for a new police station? I am sure these issues are of concern to many in town. However, to make a change many people need to speak up.

Please reach out to a Select Board member and let them know you are concerned and want the Special Election issue addressed and finalized at their Nov. 25 meeting.

Robert E.W. Collins
Dalton, Mass.

 

 

View Full Story

More Stories