Stockbridge — The town’s Planning Board met on Wednesday, February 3, to discuss a brief agenda. Of note, members voted unanimously to design an assessment process for potential Chapter 61 parcels. This action comes in response to concerns from Stockbridge residents over the fate of 0 Interlaken Cross Road last year.
Introducing the agenda item, Planning Board Chair Kate Fletcher explained, “[Chapter 61] provides people with an option to put their land into one of three programs. One is for timber, one is for agriculture, and then the third is for open-space and recreation. So the idea is that in exchange for stewarding these parcels, based on their attributes that meet the requirements of the program, the owners of the parcels get a [property] tax break.”
According to the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR), “The point of Chapter 61 programs is to help keep land undeveloped.” Accordingly, when a landowner withdraws from the Chapter 61 program, the municipality in which the parcel is located has right of first refusal. The municipality then has only 120 days to move forward with a decision.
Fletcher acknowledged that this mandated timeframe is one of the program’s key challenges. “We saw this last year with the Interlaken Cross Road parcel where people were concerned about what this represented and what would happen,” she explained. “And yet there was a very short timeframe within which to think about the parcel and act. So I certainly heard the concerns of residents in that area, and this program is what it is. But what I thought we could do was have David Cameron, who supports us on the [Lake and Pond Overlay District], evaluate these parcels so that we know a little bit more about them as they come on the market.”
Cameron is an environmental consultant and principal at Fleetwood Environmental Solutions LLC. He regularly consults with the Town of Stockbridge on environmental issues. “My proposition is to put together a very simple one-page report for each of these parcels,” explained Cameron. In this report, Cameron would conduct a “desktop review” to identify the positive and negative attributes of each parcel.
From a draft list of 22 attributes, Cameron stated that 20 are characterized as positive, “meaning things like outstanding resource waters in wellhead protection areas, and prime forest land and endangered species habitats and wetlands, and streams.”
The remaining two on Cameron’s list are negatives. “Those would be underground storage tanks and MassDEP 21E sites,” he explained. “21E sites are sites that are in the hazardous waste database for MassDEP permutation. Whether they’re closed out or active, they’ve been impacted, the soils in the ground and/or groundwater have been impacted in some way.”
Other factors Cameron would consider include existing structures, easements, and encroachments.
Using this list, Cameron would generate a report for each parcel and assign a rating that indicates its value. When the right of first refusal is triggered, the town can refer to the report to make a more informed and quick decision as to whether or not they are interested.
Planning Board members were agreeable to the plan. Cameron will submit a sample report on one of the 107 parcels of interest for the next Planning Board meeting, date and time to be determined.
What happened with Interlaken Cross Road?
The Interlaken Cross Road parcel, once part of the Chapter 61 program, first went on the market in February 2025. The town’s Select Board and Finance Committee were against the purchase, claiming it would put an unnecessary tax burden on residents and the town’s free cash reserves. At the time, the town’s environmental advisor had not been consulted on the parcel.
A group of residents concerned about how the land would be developed delayed the Select Board’s decision and successfully petitioned to include an article in the 2025 Annual Town Meeting Warrant. The article proposed that the town use an amount “not to exceed $600,000 from Free Cash” to purchase the parcel.
The Select Board moved to present the article at the May 19, 2025, Annual Town Meeting. It was listed as Article 17.
Town Meeting attendees ultimately voted against Article 17, 135-65.
Correction: In the original article, Fletcher is misquoted as saying “open space and entertainment”. She said “open space and recreation”.
