Letter: Voters Should Reject Changes to RR Zone

Letter to the EditorPrint Story | Email Story

To the Editor:

Williamstown residents attending town meeting on Tuesday, May 17, would be well-advised to watch the most recent "Talks on the Hill" at Williamstown Rural Lands, now playing on WilliNet.

It is hard not to conclude that town voters should reject the Planning Board's proposed articles with respect to our Rural Residence districts. In a succinct 30-minute presentation on "Low-Density Development," Regina Fink and Annika Harrington provide viewers with a deep understanding of the complexities of rural development and housing, delivered with a clarity that has been lacking from the Planning Board itself.

With neither research nor actual planning, the board is bringing a lengthy and confusing list of changes to town meeting. In origin and conception, several proposals treat the General and Rural Residence districts as equivalent, reducing lot sizes, decreasing frontage requirements, and allowing multi-unit buildings in both, as if equity were somehow served by using the same broad brush on zones that are different for a reason.

Rural Residence lands are not on the town water and sewer, they are farther from services and goods, and they provide important ecosystem benefits, such as farm and forestland, wildlife and plant preservation, stormwater management and carbon sequestration. As the climate crisis changes the paradigms by which our society can expect to live and survive, it is disheartening to see our Planning Board present us with a shallow, outdated, and naïve plan that will only further fragment our vital rural areas, without the slightest advantage in terms of affordability and equity.



The proposals are being championed by those who are rightly concerned about the lack of affordable housing in Williamstown, but Ms. Fink and Ms. Harrington pointed to research showing that the simplistic approach proposed by our Planning Board could have exactly the opposite effect, driving up housing prices and only further limiting access to the rich.

I urge town voters not to support the Planning Board's ill-conceived proposals for the Rural Residence district. Let's demand instead that the Board come back again after having done their own actual planning, research, and creative thinking.

Anne O'Connor
Williamstown, Mass.

 

 

 

 


Tags: town meeting 2022,   zoning,   

If you would like to contribute information on this article, contact us at info@iberkshires.com.

Mount Greylock School Committee Sets 2026-27 Agenda

By Stephen DravisiBerkshires Staff
WILLIAMSTOWN, Mass. — The Mount Greylock School Committee last month laid out its priorities for the next year while acknowledging three members of the seven-person panel may be gone by November.
 
In a special in-person meeting at the middle-high school on a Saturday morning in August, the School Committee finalized its goals for the academic year ahead.
 
The four-hour meeting was attended by six of the committee's seven members, including three who face challengers in the Nov. 3 election.
 
The committee ended up agreeing on five goals to set for 2026-27: setting regular meetings and getting regular reports from its Outcomes Subcommittee; improving community outreach by the full committee; implementing a committee member orientation plan for the at least one new member who will be elected in the fall; advancing a district-wide "visions and values" process; and aligning the committee's practice with state requirements for a student representative.
 
Before the group got into goal-setting, it reviewed the results of a self-evaluation process it undertook for the previous academic year.
 
Members noted that in 38 areas outlined by the Massachusetts Association of School Committees, the seven Mount Greylock members rated its own performance as below satisfactory in just seven. And it was those areas that are addressed in the goals for 2026-27. 
 
The MASC has five different subcategories headed "community engagement," and the MGRSC members rated themselves between 2.9 and 3.3 on a scale of 1 to 4 in three of the five. The lowest score in the self-evaluation was for the topic of "Community Engagement - Building Support" with an aggregate score of 2.86 and two of the seven members giving the panel a score of 2 in the wake of a budget season when one of the district's two towns chose to amend the district's budget on the floor of its town meeting.
 
View Full Story

More Williamstown Stories