image description
Roger Lawrence, center, and members of the Williamstown Planning Board on Saturday participate in a site visit at proposed subdivision site off Summer Street.

Summer Street Residents Make Case to Williamstown Planning Board

By Stephen DravisiBerkshires Staff
Print Story | Email Story
WILLIAMSTOWN, Mass. — Neighbors of a proposed subdivision off Summer Street last week asked the Planning Board to take a critical look at the project, which the residents say is out of scale to the neighborhood.
 
Northern Berkshire Habitat for Humanity was at Town Hall last Tuesday to present to the planners a preliminary plan to build five houses on a 1.75 acre lot currently owned by town's Affordable Housing Trust.
 
The subdivision includes the construction of a road from Summer Street onto the property to provide access to five new building lots of about a quarter-acre apiece.
 
Several residents addressed the board from the floor of the meeting to share their objections to the proposed subdivision.
 
"I support the mission of Habitat," Summer Street resident Christopher Bolton told the board. "There's been a lot of concern in the neighborhood. We had a neighborhood meeting [Monday] night, and about half the houses were represented.
 
"I'm impressed with the generosity of my neighbors wanting to contribute to help with the housing crisis in the town and enthusiastic about a Habitat house on that property or maybe two or even three, if that's the plan. … What I've heard is a lot of concern in the neighborhood about the scale of the development, that in a very small neighborhood of 23 houses, five houses, close together on a plot like this will change the character of the neighborhood dramatically."
 
Last week's presentation from NBHFH was just the beginning of a process that ultimately would include a definitive subdivision plan for an up or down vote from the board.
 
Town Planner Andrew Groff explained that the preliminary plan submission was meant to initiate a dialogue between the planners and the prospective developer about what sort of issues might come up in the final submission process.
 
The planners have about a month and a half to vote for or against the preliminary plan at the end of that dialogue. Either way, a full hearing and consideration of the subdivision plan would be needed before any shovels went in the ground.
 
Bolton last week offered a few questions for the Planning Board to consider about issues that he argued were within the board's jurisdiction: whether the local non-profit has the resources to see the project through to completion, "in a way that reflects best practices and longevity;" whether Habitat has the resources to maintain the new road until it is accepted by the town, as the organization hopes; will the town ever take the step of accepting the road, and how long will Habitat be forced to maintain the infrastructure; and whether the town stormwater system has the capacity to take on the increased impervious coverage in what is currently a vacant lot.
 
Northern Berkshire Habitat for Humanity President Keith Davis addressed many of Bolton's questions by telling the board that he, engineer Charlie LaBatt of Guntlow and Associates and Groff will sit down in the next few weeks with Department of Public Works Director to discuss plans for the road and make sure it was up to town standards. Clough earlier this year raised concerns about an established private road seeking town acceptance — a request ultimately withdrawn by the Sweet Farm Road Homeowners Association.
 
Davis told the Planning Board that he hoped to be able to bring to town meeting a request to accept the planned road onto the Summer Street lot as soon as May 2025 — near the start of what is expected to be a five-year buildout for the five volunteer-built homes on the parcel.
 
The April 9 presentation from Northern Berkshire Habitat began with an appearance from LaBatt, a civil engineer working on the project.
 
He walked the planners through a handful of waivers that the non-profit will be seeking from strict compliance with the town's subdivision bylaw and discussed some of the stormwater management plans for the property.
 
Since the parcel includes a small wetland jurisdictional to the Conservation Commission, Habitat also will be before that body with a Notice of Intent if it continues to pursue the development. But drainage also is an issue for the Planning Board.
 
"The lot is currently improved with some drainage," LaBatt told the board. "The site and topography … would allow sheet runoff off the road. And the topography of the site allows flow in the northwest direction, where we propose to do our stormwater management — some retention/detention of stormwater before it goes into the municipal system.
 
"Currently, the undeveloped parcel flows in that direction."
 
One of the waivers from the subdivision bylaw, which LaBatt characterized as "a little outdated," is relief from the code's requirement for curbing on streets in a subdivision. Besides the facts that uncurbed roads are common in town and that curbing tends to make roads feel narrower unless additional pavement is added on each side of the road, curbing would impede the overland flow of stormwater into swales, LaBatt said.
 
In answer to a public comment about current drainage issues on the site, LaBatt later elaborated on the preliminary design.
 
"We'll be designing kind of a detention/retention pond with an overflow, essentially," he said. "The overflow would pipe to the drainage system that's in the roadway. We can also install an underdrain under the rain garden that goes to that as well. So we can still use the rain garden to filter the runoff, to clean it, but underdrain it and send it into that system to try not to exacerbate the groundwater table in that area if so desired.
 
"That's not uncommon when we're in C/D type soils anyway, because there's really not that much [water] going in there, so we often, so we don't have a full pond all the time, we underdrain them so we can still let them filter — recognizing that, sure, we'd love to have recharge, but sometimes it's not as practical."
 
Later, Summer Street resident Myles Evans indicated that the stormwater management plan for the proposed development is too aspirational.
 
"I hear a lot of good intentions, which is great," Evans said. "But given the drainage crisis we're already dealing with on that street, it seems like something where, 'This is what we intend to happen …, 'This is what we hope will happen …' is not very reassuring to the people who live on the street now.
 
"Again, I'm happy to put a house there or two houses there. I'm just a little confused as to why there has to be this many houses on this piece of land,"
 
In reply, Davis stressed that the stormwater management plan is still in the design phase — as is the entire project, which is why Habitat is engaging in the preliminary review with the Planning Board.
 
"I have full faith that we can engineer this," Davis said. "It's not a hope. It's a plan. It's just that it's not a complete plan yet. This is a preliminary plan. Hopefully, we can work out — and yes, I use the word 'hopefully' — all these bugs. If we can't work out all the bugs and we have to reduce the number of houses in order to do it, that adds to the cost of each house. Take the road and divide its cost by five, four, three or, as one person just suggested, two, and put it to the cost of each house."
 
Davis explained that given the lot's shape, it only has frontage on Summer Street sufficient for one residential structure under the zoning bylaw. However, if the road is constructed — at an estimated cost of $120,000, Habitat can build up to five new 1,200-square-foot homes that meet the dimensional requirements of the bylaw for frontage, lot size and setbacks.
 
"We sell these as affordable homes with deed restrictions," Davis said. "These meet the needs of people who make 30 to 60 percent of the area median income in Williamstown. We price the mortgage so their mortgage, insurance and property taxes won't exceed 30 percent of their income. The difference between what we get out of the sale of the house and what it costs to build it, we have to make in fund-raising, grants the Affordable Housing Trust … Somehow, we have to cover it. We don't get back as much as it costs to build each house."
 
A couple of residents encouraged the Planning Board to support the subdivision plan as submitted.
 
"Land is precious in town," Anne Skinner said. "There aren't a lot of places where we can build houses in town. We know we need to build houses. I'm assuming engineers know how to deal with things like drainage. If the engineering for drainage problems can be solved, I think we should build as many houses as we can, simply because we need them."
 
Summer Street resident Kendra Isbell challenged that notion.
 
"We fully support Habitat, but I wonder if you were the ones sitting across the street from the construction project, would you be up at the microphone making the same comment about, 'Yes, let's put this subdivision of five houses in a neighborhood that only has 23 houses to begin with?' " Isbell asked.
 
"This is an entirely different look for the neighborhood. We support th emission of having more housing, but to say, 'Let's put five houses right on this parcel of land with these giant old trees and all the drainage problems and traffic coming and out of there,' again, I think if you were living on the street and in all the houses surrounding that, I wonder if you would be up here saying the same exact thing."
 
The Planning Board after Tuesday's preliminary meeting scheduled a site visit for Saturday morning. 

Tags: affordable housing,   habitat for humanity,   Planning Board,   

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

Guest Column: Full Steam Ahead: Bringing Back the Northern Tier Passenger Railroad

by Thomas HuckansGuest Column

You only need a glance outside to see a problem all too familiar to Berkshire county: closing businesses, a shrinking population, and a stunning lack of regional investment.

But 70 years ago, this wasn't an issue. On the North Adams-Boston passenger rail line before the '60s, Berkshires residents could easily go to Boston and back in a day, and the region benefited from economic influx. But as cars supplanted trains, the Northern Tier was terminated, and now only freight trains regularly use the line.

We now have a wonderful opportunity to bring back passenger rail: Bill S.2054, sponsored by state Sen. Jo Comerford (D-Hampshire, Franklin, and Worcester), was passed to study the potential for restoring rail from Boston to North Adams. In the final phase of MassDOT's study, the project is acquiring increased support and momentum. The rail's value cannot be understated: it would serve the Berkshire region, the state, and the environment by reducing traffic congestion, fostering economic growth, and cutting carbon emissions. The best part? All of us can take action to push the project forward.

Importantly, the Northern Tier would combat the inequity in infrastructure investment between eastern and western Massachusetts. For decades, the state has poured money into Boston-area projects. Perhaps the most infamous example is the Big Dig, a car infrastructure investment subject to endless delays, problems, and scandals, sucking up $24.3 billion. Considering the economic stagnation in Western Massachusetts, the disparity couldn't come at a worse time: Berkshire County was the only county in Massachusetts to report an overall population loss in the latest census.

The Northern Tier could rectify that imbalance. During the construction phase alone, 4,000 jobs and $2.3 billion of economic output would be created. After that, the existence of passenger rail would encourage Bostonians to live farther outside the city. Overall, this could lead to a population increase and greater investment in communities nearby stops. In addition to reducing carbon emissions, adding rail travel options could help reduce traffic congestion and noise pollution along Route 2 and the MassPike.

The most viable plan would take under three hours from North Adams to Shelburne Falls, Greenfield, Athol, Gardner, Fitchburg, Porter, and North Station, and would cost just under $1.6 billion.

A common critique of the Northern Tier Rail Restoration is its price tag. However, the project would take advantage of the expansion of federal and state funds, namely through $80 billion the Department of Transportation has to allocate to transportation projects. Moreover, compared to similar rail projects (like the $4 billion planned southern Massachusetts East-West line), the Northern Tier would be remarkably cheap.

One advantage? There's no need to lay new tracks. Aside from certain track upgrades, the major construction for the Northern Tier would be stations and crossings, thus its remarkably short construction phase of two to four years. In comparison, the Hartford line, running from Hartford, Conn., to Springfield spans barely 30 miles, yet cost $750 million.

In contrast, the Northern Tier would stretch over 140 miles for just over double the price.

So what can we do? A key obstacle to the Northern Tier passing through MassDOT is its estimated ridership and projected economic and environmental benefits. All of these metrics are undercounted in the most recent study.

Crucially, many drivers don't use the route that MassDOT assumes in its models as the alternative to the rail line, Route 2. due to its congestion and windy roads. In fact, even as far west as Greenfield, navigation services will recommend drivers take I-90, increasing the vehicle miles traveled and the ensuing carbon footprint.

Seeking to capture the discrepancy, a student-led Northern Tier research team from Williams College has developed and distributed a driving survey, which has already shown more than half of Williams students take the interstate to Boston. Taking the survey is an excellent way to contribute, as all data (which is anonymous) will be sent to MassDOT to factor into their benefit-cost analysis. This link takes you to the 60-second survey.

Another way to help is to spread the word. Talk to local family, friends, and community members, raising awareness of the project's benefits for our region. Attend MassDOT online meetings, and send state legislators and local officials a short letter or email letting them know you support the Northern Tier Passenger Rail Project. If you feel especially motivated, the Williams Northern Tier Research team, in collaboration with the Center for Learning in Action (CLiA), would welcome support.

Living far from the powerbrokers in Boston, it's easy to feel powerless to make positive change for our greater community. But with your support, the Northern Tier Rail can become reality, bringing investment back to Berkshire County, making the world greener, and improving the lives of generations of western Massachusetts residents to come.

Thomas Huckans, class of 2026, is a political science and astronomy major at Williams College, originally from Bloomsburg, Pa.

Survey: This survey records driving patterns from Berkshire county to Boston, specifically route and time. It also captures interest in the restoration of the Northern Tier Passenger Rail. Filling out this survey is a massive help for the cause, and all responses are greatly appreciated. Use this link.

View Full Story

More Williamstown Stories