Stockbridge — By all accounts, the 314-acre DeSisto parcel at 35–37 Interlaken Road includes some of the most picturesque natural beauty in the Berkshires—forest, hillside, and overlooks. But that stunning horizon has presented a conundrum to Stockbridge select boards since 2016 over proposals to develop the parcel while residents clamor to preserve the tract, maintaining its iconic views.
Finally, after five difficult months of presentations, amendments, negotiations, public hearings, and reviews, the currently seated Select Board has found a solution, unanimously approving a multi-use project that not only conserves two-thirds of the site but allows for the restoration of the star of the show: an 1890s Gilded Age mansion in accordance with the town’s Cottage Era Estates Adaptive Re-Use or Rehabilitation bylaw. That regulation allows for the development of a historic site if the project proponent preserves, restores, or improves the structure’s original features.
The conservation plan can be found here.
The May 15 decision pushes forward a special permit covering the property that was filed in November, but with 32 conditions ironed out by Town Counsel Christopher Heep during the last two days together with Jonathan Silverstein, the attorney for developer 35–37 Interlaken Realty Trust (owner Patrick Sheehan), and project engineer Jim Scalise, president of SK Design Group Inc.
A video of that historic Select Board vote can be found here.
Specifically, the major provisions within the approved special permit and its conditions, in addition to filed plans, include:
- The buildout of a total of 23 single-family homes and four town homes that may be converted into single-family homes, nine hotel suites, 133 hotel residential units, dining facilities consisting of two restaurants and drinking facilities with 250 seats at most, conference/retreat facilities, and hotel amenities such as pools and tennis courts to be located east of the wetlands;
- The preservation of the mansion’s front façade and 50 percent of its two side facades, with the preservation or replication of its front roofline and chimneys, and the preservation of the interior architectural pieces in its common areas “to the extent practicable”;
- No structure can have a height greater than the existing mansion’s 40 feet, or a gross floor area greater than 37,110 square feet, the gross floor area of the mansion, with the proposed buildings on the site plan being able to be reconfigured to achieve this result;
- No development or structures are allowed between the mansion front and the street;
- A conservation restriction covering 220 acres of the tract, with certain activity prohibitions and allowances including the banning of motorized recreational vehicles or building of structures but allowing vegetative management and trail additions, with the consent of the Conservation Commission;
- A Stormwater Management and Erosion Control Permit must be granted and Stormwater Pollution Prevention and Construction Traffic Management plans, among other plans submitted before work begins, and such plans reviewed prior to each construction phase to ensure compliance with the special permit provisions;
- No pesticides or herbicides to be used within 200 feet of the wetlands;
- No outdoor amplification and restricted noise levels;
- Mansion preservation is to be completed in the project’s first phase to the satisfaction of the building commissioner and before any other project phases begin, but that work can be performed concurrently with renovating the existing structures, two restaurants, and a barn;
- Exterior construction hours of 7 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Saturdays, must be maintained, with no exterior construction on Sundays or national holidays, and construction equipment to be kept away from the property lines as much as is practical;
- The developer will donate $25,000 for each single-family residence built on the property as well as $175,000 to the town for a community benefit if the developer doesn’t expend funds related to an appeal of the special permit; and
- Excess produce is encouraged to be donated to local food recipients, including affordable-housing sites and the farmers’ market.
Although banning fireworks on the property was discussed, Select Board member Ernest “Chuck” Cardillo pushed to withdraw the condition from the special permit, opting instead for the group to develop a fireworks bylaw this summer.
For White, the decision boiled down to dollars and cents, as he balanced the anticipated costs of the town’s planned fire and emergency medical services (EMS) project and rising costs of education with the potential revenue the project can bring to Stockbridge with residential property taxes from its single-family houses and townhomes as well as occupancy taxes attributable to the resort. He projected those revenues to be $2.5 million to $4 million for the town.
“I think that we have to consider how we do the things that we may want to do,” White said prior to the vote. “And that’s going to weigh heavily on my decision tonight.”
After the conditions were read aloud and discussed, Cardillo implored the constituency to realize how difficult the special permit proceedings have been on the dais, with board members conducting research and making calls to residents to gather more information. He praised his colleagues for the group’s conduct during tense public hearings, with the last session allowing second and third rounds for input.
Following the vote, Silverstein commended the collaborative process employed to get to the evening’s decision and his team’s attempt to address issues raised in previous failed filings before moving forward with the 2024 special permit application. “We’re really pleased that the board voted in favor of this project, and we look forward to working with the town in the future and proving those who have concerns about the project, proving to them that those concerns won’t pan out in the long run,” he said.
The public hearings brought out residents and abutters who voiced doubt in the project, although the endeavor had its share of supporters as well. Acknowledging that not every resident is happy with the decision, Cardillo spoke of moving forward as a town. “We have to decide what’s right for the town as a whole,” he said in an interview with The Berkshire Edge. “They followed the rules and regulations—this is the bylaw the town voted on.”
Although the Cottage Era Estates bylaw governing the proposal gave the board “a lot of discretion,” Cardillo said members’ hands were tied to that regulation. “When you buy a piece of property next to a potential development, that’s the chance you take,” he said of the abutters’ concerns.
But, for Cardillo, the possible buildout of 62 houses plus an additional 62 accessory dwelling units on the site along with the option to have structures 40 feet off the front of the property obstructing the sight of the mansion “would be far worse than what’s going there.” “If you don’t grow your tax base, you keep taxing the same base over and over again,” he said. “You’ve got to have some type of growth; you can’t just stop and preserve every piece of land.”
According to Cardillo, the town has more than 40 percent of its land in some type of conservation category. “I think it’s a very sensible project,” he said. “The developer is very committed to the town. He’s a high-end-level business person. He’s not a realtor investor—he’s a businessperson, so he’s going to make sure that this goes through the way it should go through. I have every confidence that if there’s any issue, he will work with the town as [it] arise[s].
Cardillo highlighted the “massive concessions” made by the developer to the project “to make it fit the town, to make it work.” “They’ve got to make this profitable too for them, so I do believe it is the right decision based on everything that was presented,” he said.
Attorney Peter Puciloski represents abutters Valerie and Allen Hyman, who voiced opposition to the project. He told The Berkshire Edge that only one condition—the noise limitation as determined at the perimeter of the property—spoke to his clients.
The buffer plan can be found here.
“In no way does the [Cottage Era Estate] bylaw permit what the board allowed, and we’re considering our options,” Puciloski said.
An appeal to the state Land Court is the only option left to his clients and must be made within 20 days after the signed decision is delivered to the town clerk.
“As far as other [DeSisto project] permits, I’m sure we’ll be involved because they do affect the abutters,” Puciloski said.
