West Stockbridge — Town resident Elaine Hoffman is nostalgic about her residence on Route 41, with the nearly four-acre tract having been her parents’ home since 1965. Four decades ago, she returned to the area and built her own home on the property, subdividing the lot. When her parents died, the Hoffman Pottery entrepreneur began renting the extra house on the partitioned adjacent lot, registering the unit as a short-term rental (STR) with the Commonwealth. However, that use isn’t permitted by the town’s current bylaws, an issue the West Stockbridge Planning Board is trying to fix.
On July 15, the Planning Board approved a short-term rental bylaw that was subsequently sent to the Select Board for review. Those terms were provided to The Berkshire Edge on July 27 following a records request. The bylaw states that all local STRs must be registered with the town administrator and can’t be rented for more than 30 consecutive days. The rental of these units is capped at 40 days annually, with an option for an additional 40 days by the granting of a special permit.
The STR limitation struck a chord with residents Sheela and Jim Clary [DISCLAIMER: Sheela Clary is a contributing columnist for The Berkshire Edge] who rent their cabin—located on a nearby tract to their home—as a short-term rental for about 130 to 150 days between September and mid-June, in addition to serving as a longer summer rental. Hoffman said she rents her unit for 40 to 90 days yearly.
Attending the Planning Board’s August 26 meeting that was held in person only, Sheela Clary said her research shows the rental limits proposed in the West Stockbridge bylaw—a maximum of 80 days annually—is the most restrictive of any other town in the area, with Lenox’s limit being 110 days per year and Great Barrington’s limit capped at 150 days per year. She said most regulations she came across fell in the range of 110 to 150 annual days allowed for an STR to be rented, with West Stockbridge’s proposal “out of line with other local towns.”
“I’m not opposed to some regulatory aspect to this, it’s just what’s been presented just seems to be very punitive, somewhat extreme,” Jim Clary said.
Planning Board Chair Dana Bixby interrupted that the proposed regulation is “not punitive, but regulatory.”
“It seems restrictive if you are renting an AirbnB, but if you’re a young family trying to buy a house in West Stockbridge, to be a part of the community, it’s punitive or restrictive that there are 200 AirbnB houses listed,” Board member Ryan Beattie added.
Bixby said the proposal emanated from discussions with Zoning Board of Appeals Chair C. Randolph Thunfors and Finance Committee Chair Robert Salerno, as well as reviews of STRs from other towns, with Thunfors nixing a suggestion of 180 days as being “too much.” Beattie said he found the limitation ranged from 90 days to 120 days, although he agreed with the 80-day annual maximum should the applicant be granted a special permit.
“It’s less than what Lenox allows in the same structure,” Bixby said of the limitation. “The sense was that there was a number that was appropriate so that we don’t create an incentive for people to take houses off the general rental market … The purpose of zoning is to promote the general welfare. The general interest of the town is to preserve its housing stock and not have it be turned into a whole bunch of houses owned by absentee corporations.”
To Sheela Clary, her non-winterized unit “doesn’t, in any way, fit that criteria,” with Bixby commenting that maybe an exception is warranted to the STR proposal for full-time residents who rent their off-site units.
Beattie opined that the town could have “hundreds” of STRs, constituting an issue “with more and more and more houses becom[ing] hotels, essentially.”
“What we were doing was we were taking residential neighborhoods and filling it with something that would otherwise be considered a commercial use,” said resident Joseph Roy, who also serves on the town’s Zoning Board of Appeals. “And, if it gets out of hand, you’re literally changing zoning districts by doing that.”
Bixby likened STRs to a home occupation, a business use in a residentially zoned district.
Hoffman countered that her home is far from her neighbors and, when she began her rental, asked abutters if they had a problem with her STR, to which they said “no.” She said she doesn’t allow parties on the site and shuts down any noise at 9 p.m.
“The law isn’t needed for people like you who run your things well,” Bixby said. “The law is needed for people who don’t run them well. The law is needed for people that want to rent their big house for wedding receptions and a commercial use.”
According to Bixby, the town’s attorney modified the group’s proposed STR regulation, changing “30 consecutive days” to “31 consecutive days” to align with the state’s definition of the STR term, with any rental beyond 31 days as not being a STR.
“We can better afford to live here, maintain our property, and contribute to the community, thanks to this extra money,” Sheela Clary told The Berkshire Edge following the meeting. “There may be people getting rich off of Airbnb, but it’s not us.”
Accessory dwelling unit proposal
On the same day as Planning Board members approved a proposed STR regulation, the dais assented to a draft of a bylaw addressing attached dwelling units (ADUs). ADUs include in-law apartments either attached or detached from a family home, such as a backyard cottage or basement unit.
Although the evening’s agenda included a discussion on the draft ADU regulations, Bixby threw up her hands regarding a conversation on the proposal, with the draft confirmed only days before new state legislation covering the rentals was executed. The ADU discussion was rolled over to a future Planning Board meeting.
“I don’t understand the new state law,” Bixby said. She said she spoke with town counsel and a representative of the Berkshire Regional Planning Commission about the legislation that will be enforced in February.
“I have to be very blunt and frank for the record,” Bixby said. “I have no interest in putting any more of my volunteer time into writing zoning for this town when the state brings in things that we can’t control. This town needs to support the issues of zoning and planning with the creation of a position of a part-time planner, a full-time planner, I don’t really know. Not my job to say. I don’t want to do this again.”
On August 6, the Healey Administration approved the $5.1 billion Affordable Homes Act, legislation intended to provide more than 65,000 homes within the Commonwealth by 2029. Touted as “the most ambitious legislation in Massachusetts to tackle the state’s greatest challenge—housing costs,” the law denies municipalities the ability to unreasonably restrict ADUs, states a press release produced by the administration’s Press Secretary Karissa Hand. Specifically, the provision allows single-family homeowners the right to offer one ADU under 900 square feet on the property without local zoning approval such as a town special permit or variance. The release estimates that about 8,000 to 10,000 ADUs will be created in the next five years because of the new law. However, the construction of ADUs is still governed by local building codes.
To date, West Stockbridge lacks regulations governing this type of unit, but the proposal provides 900 square feet as a maximum ADU size, in accord with the new state law. Other towns within the Commonwealth, such as Natick, are similarly wrestling with the terms of the recent legislation and what that might mean for residents, including what control local municipalities may retain over ADUs through “reasonable regulations” of size restrictions in addition to height and setback requirements.
