Williamstown Expects Third of Spruces Homes Restored

By Andy McKeeveriBerkshires Staff
06:16AM / Wednesday, December 14, 2011Print Story | Email Story

Administrative Assistant Kathy Poirot swears in Van Ellet and Bilal Ansari to the Affordable Housing Committee.

WILLIAMSTOWN, Mass. — Town Manager Peter Fohlin doubts that any more than 75 homes at the Spruces Mobile Home Park will be reoccupied, barely a third of the park's residences.

Fohlin said on Monday that 54 owners have been issued occupancy permits but that might be the end of the "low-hanging fruit." Demolition permits were issued for 57 homes — the first time demolition permits outnumbered the occupancy permits. The park was damaged by flooding during Tropical Storm Irene.

"We're pretty much through the low-hanging fruit and the prospects for additional trailers passing all the necessary steps to receive a certificate of occupancy diminishes by the day. I think it is doubtful that we reach 75, which is a third of the trailers that were there before [Tropical Storm] Irene," Fohlin said.

Fohlin said seven to nine additional homes could be restored with the help of trailer supports designed by Techno Post. The homes need to abide by new building codes that require the trailer to be lifted above flood level.

Related Stories
• Spruces Owners Lay Out Demands
• Spruces Owners Sue Williamstown, State
• More Homes Powering Up at Spruces Park
• Williamstown Rules Spruces 'Uninhabitable'

Owner Morgan Management has previously said the park needs to be about 80 percent full to be sustainable. However, the company is asking the courts for permission to condense the park. That case, filed against the town and the state attorney general, has been continued until Jan. 17. Morgan Management has since added 106 tenants as defendants.

Fohlin said the town is in constant communication with both Morgan Management and Attorney General Martha Coakley's office about the case.

Owners of 138 homes that are currently condemned are qualified to received additional funding from the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Fohlin said. Eight out of 14 request letters were granted additional funding and each owner could received up to $30,200 to move or repair the home.

In other news, the Selectmen approved sending proposed zoning bylaws that would allow farms to host events to the Planning Board. The Planning Board has already encouraged the owners of Cricket Creek Farm to draft a proposal. The board now has taken the first step toward putting the changes on the town meeting warrant.

However, Selectman Tom Costley said the move to allow farms to host events was "crazy" if it was done by right instead of by special permit. Costley cited former "wars" over land use in South Williamstown, traffic increases and an "unfair" advantage the farms would have over performance spaces because of Agricultural Preservation Restriction tax incentives.

"I don't want to kill this. I want to raise those question," Costley said, adding the conversation is just beginning and the town should fully vet the proposal.

The board also appointed Bilal Ansari, Van Ellet and Kim Burnham to the Affordable Housing Committee.
Williamstown_TownManager_12112011
Tags: Irene, Spruces,

iBerkshires.com Text Ads

rk MILES Blding Materials

Are You Ready to Update Your Home? Start With rk MILES. 4 Locations (800)670-7433

www.rkmiles.com

RIBCO Supply

Check out our great lineup of Boss Plows, and spreaders. 2 Locations Clarksburg & Pittsfield!

ribcosupply.com

Summer Sizzle!

0% APR for new card holders. Apply today at Greylock! Subject to credit approval. Insured by NCUA.

www.greylock.org

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

Your Comments

iBerkshires.com welcomes critical, respectful dialogue. Name-calling, personal attacks, libel, slander or foul language is not allowed. All comments are reviewed before posting and will be deleted or edited as necessary.

Tom Costley is quickly becoming the worst selectman in a long time. I love his interpretation of "rights" versus being "allowed" to do something. It's geniuses like him that have unwittingly kept 5 Corners closed for a year. Wasn't he the guy who, in a meeting, threatened to kill someone who served his underage alcohol. The guy really needs to focus on his own business and get out of other's.
from: Costley	on: 12-14-2011 07:06AM I Agree (7) - I Disagree (7)
Editor: "Kept 5 Corners closed." In what way?
I Agree (5) - I Disagree (3)

Tom Costley is a breath of fresh air. His comment shows he is informed about the issue. "By right" is a technical zoning term that is differentiated from "by special permit." All he is saying is that the Planning Board, in whose area of expertise this proposed bylaw really needs to be evaluated, should think hard about the unintended consequences that a "by right" vs. a "by special permit" finding might have. The reason Costley is unpopular with some people is that he tends to take the long view while most people focus on narrow short-term interests.
from: Actually...	on: 12-14-2011 09:18AM I Agree (10) - I Disagree (8)

I think the previous post is onto something but perhaps places the blame too specifically. The neighbors of 5 Corners/Green River (and some local govt. folks) threw a giant stink about the installation of the playground at Green River Farm and made it difficult for the owner to pursue a sustainable business model. Now you've got a blighted, empty property with an owner who (perhaps justifiably) has an axe to grind and is fine with letting us watch the apples rot on the trees while he cools his heels in Florida. We reap what we sow.
from: Not far off	on: 12-14-2011 09:31AM I Agree (13) - I Disagree (1)

5 Corners went under for a couple different reasons, mainly bad business, but the South Williamstown NIMBYism that Mr. Costley was happy to represent was a huge factor for it staying shut. Anybody remember the playscape being deemed a house by the building inspector in the town's attempt to make the owners tear it down because South Williamstown residents considered it an eyesore? The town was finally shamed into finding a loophole to allow it because the owner demanded to see all the permits for all the roofed playscapes in Williamstown. Why would anybody buy a tourist driven store and farm that is in the middle of the hornets nest? And now he wants to make sure the town keeps control of farms that are trying to innovate and have events to stay above water. I hate politicians who want to keep people under their thumb.
from: NIMBY	on: 12-14-2011 09:59AM I Agree (14) - I Disagree (1)

Let's put the cell tower on 5 Corners!
from: Cell Tower	on: 12-14-2011 01:47PM I Agree (8) - I Disagree (0)

As one of the residents who has been working on having the technoposts done on my home at the spruces i would like to correct a statement that was printed in this article that read-Fohlin said seven to nine additional homes could be restored with the help of trailer supports designed by Techno Post. The homes need to abide by new building codes that require the trailer to be lifted above flood level.- This is incorrect as we do not have to raise our homes we only have to replace cement piers that were tilted or failed with 4 foot footers below the frost line. This is why the posts are being putting in. I just wanted to clarify this
from: vanilliafields	on: 12-15-2011 09:29AM I Agree (11) - I Disagree (1)
Editor: Thanks for the clarification.
I Agree (0) - I Disagree (0)

Williamstown Board Opts to Negotiate with College on Water St. Lot

By Stephen DravisiBerkshires Staff
05:04AM / Tuesday, June 09, 2026

Newly elected board member Nate Budington, far left, participates in his first in-person meeting along with, from left, Matt Neely, Stephanie Boyd, Peter Beck, Shana Dixon and Town Manager Robert Menicocci.

WILLIAMSTOWN, Mass. — The Select Board on Monday decided to enter into negotiations with Williams College on the sale of the vacant town-owned lot at 59 Water St.

But the board members made it clear that the college's proposal to acquire the lot is a starting point, not a final deal that the elected officials would accept.

"For the sake of continued conversation, I'm in favor of [awarding Williams the site], but if this process wasn't continued with the opportunity for further negotiation, I wouldn't vote to continue this," Peter Beck said. "I think that next step is necessary for us to get to a yes on this."

"I think there's wide agreement on that," Matthew Neely said just before the 5-0 vote to enter talks with the college.

Williams was the sole respondent to a town-issued request for proposals to develop the former town garage site, currently a dirt lot.

The college's stated intent is to build a new Facilities office and create up to 170 parking spaces at 59 Water Street. That use will allow the college to redevelop the current Facilities building site and parking lot as part of a reconception of the school's indoor athletic and recreation facilities.

Under the terms of the RFP, the college's proposal was subjected to review by an ad hoc advisory committee to the town manager, who brought the question to the Select Board. That board will have the final say on any purchase and sales agreement.

View Full Story