• Local
  • Pittsfield, MA
  • more weather >
The proposed site plan for the 100 Bridge Street development that would include affordable and market rate housing, an anchor tenant and commercial spaces.

Great Barrington Selectboard postpones recommending $40 million 100 Bridge Street project

More Info
By Wednesday, Jul 6, 2016 News 18

Great Barrington — The former New England Log Homes site on Bridge Street could be a slice of primo real estate in the heart of town.

But for 100 years it was used for manufacturing, and permeated with its final — and worst — contaminants, pentachlorophenol (PCPs) and dioxins, by the New England Log Homes Company.

Then there is the wastewater plant at its rear border, emitting, nearby residents say, a low but audible sound and occasional bursts of miasma.

But the land still has its location; it’s a short walk to downtown, and the Housatonic River flows along its western border.

The pollution has made this 8-acre brownfield tricky to develop. And the puzzle created by a $40 million proposed mixed-use development there is dogging it and the town boards trying to make permitting decisions.

Several years after New England Log Homes closed down, Community Development Corporation of South Berkshire (CDC) got hold of the land for $1, and CDC Executive Director Tim Geller has been trying to clean up the pollution and develop the site ever since.

Tim Geller, right, before the Great Barrington Selectboard. Selectboard members Ed Abrahams and Bill Cooke are listening to his presentation. Photo: Heather Bellow

Tim Geller, right, before the Great Barrington Selectboard. Selectboard members Ed Abrahams and Bill Cooke are listening to his presentation. Photo: Heather Bellow

Geller came to the Selectboard Monday (June 27) looking for a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA), which has kept its hearing for a comprehensive permit open for just the affordable housing element of 100 Bridge, the proposed larger development that would include retail, offices, market rate housing and open space. Geller showed slides of the many incarnations of the CDC’s plans for the site over the years, in an attempt to show the board just how far things have come. He also showed the board photos of the site after a fire in its remaining structures 10 years ago left heaps of charred refuse, making the land a centerpiece of blight in what is also a residential neighborhood.

Now there is the possibility of a renewal that may not please everyone, but beats the shaggy toxic field of the present, and all told is estimated by the CDC to throw off $400,000 in tax revenue to the town.

Though the plan to secure an anchor tenant and developers for the larger project remain the same as they have been for the last two years — with the same levels of risk — a permitting strategy that splits off the affordable housing permit from the rest of the development has both ZBA and Selectboard members confused and concerned.

{ "product_id": "0901", "uuid": "E60296D34D4AB72FBAD5E9FE48C5F72A", "run_date": "2016-05-11T160032+0000", "filename": "Bebop_Drone_2016-05-11T160121+0000_E60296.jpg", "media_date": "2016-05-11T160121+0000" }

A view of the southern section of 100 Bridge Street where affordable housing units would be situated. Beyond is the town’s sewage treatment plant. Photo: Isaac Scribner

At a ZBA hearing two weeks ago, concerns flared over the proposed 45 affordable housing units backing up against the wastewater plant on one side, and polluted soil on the other. The soil must be capped, or encased, by digging up the toxic top layer, moving it around, and adding clean dirt. Geller says it will have to be done all at once across the site. That alone is now being puzzled over by engineers and the Department of Environmental Protection, which has oversight of the brownfield. It is this soil remediation that has been the mightiest obstacle so far, with one heroic but failed attempt at a novel bioremediation project that, for questionable reasons, was shut down by the state last year.

Geller said the capping project would have to result in “zero” human exposure. And MassDEP, he said, will apply its “S-1 standard” of contamination levels that the agency says are acceptable for “residential use, parks, playgrounds and schoolyards.” The affordable housing and restored river area will have to comply with that standard. The rest, Geller previously told the Edge, will end up paved with the contaminated 12 to 18 inches of soil from the other areas under it.

“It all has to pass soil tests at the end of day,” he said, adding that for financing, it is “easier to finance the acquisition of a remediated site.”

Board members struggled to make a recommendation, though at an earlier meeting they had listed conditions that the aesthetic of the housing be “coherent,” and that there be protections from pollution for the affordable housing residents, since there is a possibility that housing might go up before anything else.

On that note, Town Manager Jennifer Tabakin said she was “concerned” about the lack of “commitments” from other developers and an anchor tenant. The Berkshire Co-op Market and CDC have talked for several years about the Co-op expanding there, but the Co-op says it is still looking at all its options.

This was Geller’s second meeting in which he explained that nothing has changed.

“The only difference we have here is a difference in permitting strategy,” he told the board. “It came down to financial ramifications.”

Town Manager Jennifer Tabakin, Selectboard Chair Sean Stanton and Vice Chair Steve Bannon during Geller's presentation. Photo: Heather Bellow

Town Manager Jennifer Tabakin, Selectboard Chair Sean Stanton and Vice Chair Steve Bannon during Geller’s presentation. Photo: Heather Bellow

Those ramifications have to do with the state’s oversight of affordable housing, since it will be constructed with state money, and the state puts limits on those profits. If applied to the entire site, he said, the state would be controlling the whole development. “That’s not gonna fly with developers,” he said.

And the only reason he is even seeking a special permit, he noted, was because the development is more than 20,000 square feet. 100 Bridge sits in a zone that allows precisely this type of mixed-use affair with standard permitting, he said.

“What you’re voting on tonight is really what you were voting on three months ago,” he noted.

There were some tentative responses and confused looks from the board. Various development controversies along the Castle and Bridge Streets corridor over the last year may be to blame.

Board chair Sean Stanton wasn’t sure about the whole package. “The idea of bringing this into a residential neighborhood is hard for me to swallow,” he said. “So many things that have happened…things we bet on and lost. I haven’t seen much activity on [The Berkshire] hotel down here. There are so many unknowns.”

Stanton was referring to the former Searles School across the street from the site, which a hotel developer plans to turn into an upscale hotel.

At one point Stanton questioned the need for housing, and Geller said the town has said it is vital. It is part of the town’s Master Plan.

And Geller explained that zoning at the site allows for 139 total housing units, including the market rate housing. “We only did 81,” he said.

The expanse of the 8-acre 100 Bridge Street parcel looking north toward Bridge Street. Photo: Isaac Scribner

The expanse of the 8-acre 100 Bridge Street parcel looking north toward Bridge Street. Photo: Isaac Scribner

Vice Chair Steve Bannon was worried “a suitable local tenant” might not be found.

Tabakin asked Geller why there was such a rush to push the affordable housing permitting through. “It doesn’t seem quite ready to go,” she noted.

Geller has explained at previous meetings, however, that the CDC must take its place in the state funding queue that begins this winter, but first it needs permits.

Bannon said he was reluctant to make a recommendation to ZBA because of all the unknowns about the rest of the site, though Geller kept reminding the board those unknowns have always been there.

Tabakin said she was “pushing” the board a bit for a decision, noting that the promise of 100 Bridge leveraged $700,000 in Community Preservation Act funds for the CDC over the last two years for several aspects of the project; $1 million was just approved to fix the Bridge Street bridge; and the town was awarded a $2.1 million MassWorks grant last year to upgrade Bridge Street infrastructure. “We’re in this,” she said. “This has to be a project that is meeting your goals and objectives…this is the time.”

Bannon said he wanted the board to ask the ZBA to postpone their vote “until we have time to put together a thoughtful list of conditions…this is rushed.”

But Dan Bailly said “not a whole lot has changed…we can’t tell someone what to do with the rest of the property. All we have a say in is the affordable housing. The other six acres are unknown.”

Ed Abrahams said he was ready to vote on a recommendation, with some conditions.

“We really don’t know anything except what the 40B [affordable housing] is going to look like,” Bannon said.

“Nothing has changed,” Geller said. “That indeterminate aspect has always been there.”

“It’s only a site plan,” Tabakin said. “Things happen and come up.”

But Tabakin and Bannon brought up an issue that has made some community members wince: the proximity of the affordable housing to the wastewater plant. And Tabakin further wondered how market-rate housing with a view of the tanks would go over. Bannon said he was worried that at some point, people might complain of segregation. “I can hear someone say, we really want you to blend the market rate and affordable housing.”

Geller said this “environmental justice” issue floating around town is something he is most “distressed” about. He said he envisioned 100 Bridge as an “exceptional place to live,” since it is walking distance to downtown and jobs, and some residents, he said, might even work at the hotel proposed for the other side of the street.

“It triggers something in me,” he added. “If environmental justice was an issue at this site, we wouldn’t have a relatively affluent population to the east. We’re actually doing the opposite: cleaning up the site, getting rid of contamination, and including [affordable housing] in a relatively affluent [location].”


More by »
»

18 Comments   Add Comment

  1. Patrick Fennell says:

    Until a tax paying future tenant is in place put everything on hold. It might be a good idea to move the housing away from the sewage treatment in the meantime as well

    1. Frank B. Holcomb says:

      I agree Patrick. I picture the housing units between a waste water treatment plant and possibility of some type of industries. On the surface at least, makes no sense.

  2. Sage Radachowsky says:

    Wastewater treatment also emits volatile compounds constantly. Dioxin in the ground, volatile emissions in the backyard, and a PCB laden and emitting Housatonic River flowing by. What a hell we have wreaked.

  3. Andy Moro says:

    Only Tim Geller who have make a career out of collecting other peoples money. example CPA money where 3 percent of your tax money is stole from you annually and thousands have already poured down this drain. Tim stated this would be an “Exceptional place to live”, yes lets put our children to play at a contaminated site, and the good people looking for a place to live. will enjoy the view of their very own wastewater SEWER plant. what will be the cost to relocate the plant when odor complaints start to arrive. one only needs to look at the great deal we got with the old fire house.

    1. Shawn says:

      You should try editing your comments before posting.

  4. Tamara says:

    Well Housing near a treatment plant..No… But more and more I am finding and seeing Natives born here ,raised here,Having to live with Family,or in a local Motel,with or without Children,Because sad to say there is no affordable housing for them. Stores cater to tourist as do now most restaurants,and Pricey at that. I love my town,but it is not the Place that I was raised, We are the backbone when there is no tourist and when second and third home owners return to where they have their origins,who do people think keep this area going….? Also ther is a growing rate of rentals, for short term only. Please this is getting sad…sad…sad…

    1. Patrick Fennell says:

      One reason for high rental costs are high taxes. Until taxes are controlled and the school budget goes up every year learn to live with it. Someone has to pay for an undercover Police Chief’s SUV.

      1. Jim Johnston says:

        Pretty sure our police chief is the only one in Berkshire County who patrols in his wife’s mini van … What are you talking about.

      2. Patrick Fennell says:

        Jim our chief is driving a black unmarked SUV now. It sends a bad message and any emergency vehicle should be clearly marked after all people should know who they are and be able to flag down our chief when or if needed.

      3. Jim Johnston says:

        Patrick, that is the fire chief, not the police chief.

    2. Sage Radachowsky says:

      Yes, there is such a huge class divide in U.S. and it’s most visible in the Berkshires. We second and third home owners and we have working poor, even working homeless. We have empty homes and we have people with no homes. But less costly tiny boxes next to a sewage treatment plant doesn’t sound like a good or inspiring solution.

  5. Maia Conty says:

    I share these multiple concerns about this project. Especially after reading that the toxicity that emits from sewage treatment plants are quite substantial, especially one that is processing PCB laden waters. This, in addition to the issue of “capping” the brownfield sets all kinds of alarm bells. I am concerned for anyone, especially children, to live 24/7 on top of such a compromised environment. If the proposal was to put up a bunch of fancy condominiums, I can’t imagine there would be many buyers. So to use public funds and grants to create affordable housing for low income folks reeks of “ghetto”: Put the poor people in the shitty places in order to make a profit off of what might otherwise be an unprofitable dead-zone. I hope no one, regardless of financial duress, chooses to live there. With soooo much open and healthy land in our area, why choose the most precarious to house our local families? Doesn’t make sense, until you follow the money….

    And yes, we have a serious housing crisis in our area. In the classic gentrification model, the local bedrock of our community can barely afford to live here, and now with the seasonal tourist market, are hard-pressed to find year-round homes. Although affordable housing initiatives (not on toxic waste sites, please!) are a wonderful step in the right direction, this approach is really just a band-aid. Re-envisioning an economic model that supports the health and well-being of human potential does require that we re-establish what the inalienable rights of human beings are, and that we re-define what “ownership” means. Cutting edge global conversations about Basic Incomes and Sharing Economies are beginning to address these needs in a brilliant fashion…

  6. Nancy DuVall says:

    Seems demeaning to the low income people who need housing to offer them living space between the waste water treatment plant and a commercial development. It may be “waterfront” but the views would be overrated. There must be a better place.

  7. Martin Mitsoff says:

    Maia Conty’s thoughtful insights and philosophy consistently go to the heart of the matter: Great Barrington and many other communities in south Berkshire County need to offer high-quality affordable housing, not on dreg-land but on healthy land and NOT in isolated areas but within our neighborhoods. As property taxpayers (whether full-time or part-time), we need to form constructive partnerships with developers that (i) eschew super-market returns (to those that finance such deals) and (ii) send a resounding signal to our valuable, but low-paid, workers and families that we care about them. On this issue, I agree with the doubts expressed by the Town’s Select Board and ZBA – Great Barrington can do better than this and thus lead, by example, communities like Sheffield (where there is almost no affordable housing).

  8. Beth Carlson says:

    A good way to have an impact on this project is to send letters to the CDC of Southern Berkshires, to the Executive Director Tim Geller, The Director of Development Holly Nelson or to the CDC board of Directors. The mailing address is:

    Community Development Corporation of South Berkshire
    P.O. Box 733 Great Barrington, MA 01230

    Email address is: info@cdcsb.org (don’t know how this is vetted–if it is a good conduit or not)

    The list of the Board of Directors is here:

    https://cdcsb.org/about-us/board-directors

    Their mission statement is also of interest: https://cdcsb.org/about-us/mission

    Let them know what you think!

  9. Dan Alden says:

    An ideal location for a large municipal park & parking lot that could a) be nicely landscaped and integrated into both the pedestrian and vehicular traffic flow to protect the integrity of the existing neighborhood for relatively minimal cost b) tie in to the River walk & other pre-existing resources and c) create enough capacity to allow for immediate decongestion and support future growth of the entire downtown business corridor for years to come.

    1. DB says:

      You sound right on Dan.

    2. Naomi Blumenthal says:

      I think that is a lovely and useful idea. Maybe some large-scale trees and shrubs could be planted to screen the treatment plant right away just to make the area a more appealing place even just to start off with, regardless of what comes later in the brownfield. It’s an eyesore for everyone the way it is now, especially for the people who live nearby. If they could cap a zone for a planting area and make it attractive, perhaps it would get the ball rolling.

What's your opinion?

We welcome your comments and appreciate your respect for others. We kindly ask you to keep your comments as civil and focused as possible. If this is your first time leaving a comment on our website we will send you an email confirmation to validate your identity.