Letters: Using Lowry Property Strains Trust

To the Editor:

The first time we drove up Stratton Road, the land we now know as the Lowry took our breath away. We thought it must have been a masterstroke of town planning that had put such a magnificent open space in the midst of a relatively densely populated neighborhood, allowing folks living there to occupy smaller spaces but still enjoy a great natural resource — in harmony with other living creatures.

We were overjoyed when a condo there became available. Before purchasing it, I spoke with neighbors and at least four other people holding significant positions in the town. I even called Town Hall. All said that the land was indeed in conservation, protected in perpetuity. Williamstown valued open space, and the land held agricultural significance. All of these people honestly believed what they said to be true. In fact, even now there are properties for sale listed as "abuts protected land."

There are others who feel similarly betrayed. The trust we had in government has been dealt a severe blow. We can only hope that describing our situation will forewarn others considering buying property in Williamstown. Sometimes "trust but verify" does not work.

Suzanne Kemple
Williamstown
April 4, 2013

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.