<FCFORMSHEADER>
<?xml version="1.0"?>

<!DOCTYPE FIRSTCLASS SYSTEM "firstclass.dtd">

<firstclass>

	<fcobject objtype="oDocument" formid="96" objname="Selectman's Meeting Minutes">

		<subject index="0" >September 2004</subject>

		<field id="8010" index="0" type="text">Selectman's Meeting Minutes</field>

		<field id="2000" index="0" type="number">0</field>

		<field id="3999" index="0" type="number">0</field>

	</fcobject>

</firstclass>

</FCFORMSHEADER>
September 7, 2004

Present:  Cris Irsfeld, Deb McMenamy, George Shippey, Michael Nathan, Beth Laster, Roslin Levitt, Eric Spritz-CTSB, Pam Sandler, Tom Flynn, Mark Brauer, David Maxson
Hilary Maxson, Bert King, Chuck Regabutti, David Hellman, Roslin Levitt, and Jorja Marsden

Cris opened the special permit hearing for Michael Nathan and Beth Laster by reading the legal notice, which appeared in the Berkshire Eagle on August 25 and September 1.  Mr. Nathan and Ms. Laster wish to demolish the existing one-story house and provide a new foundation and crawl space and create a 2 ½-story house with a deck and garage.  The property is located in the R-2 zone.   The property lacks the requisite frontage and acreage for an R-2 zone and lies within 150 setback from the lake.  Application is made under 6.1.2.   
Attorney Hellman explained that the house is only 43 years old therefore; it does not meet the requirements of the demolition bylaw.  Six trees will be taken down which are close to the house.  The trees will be replaced with other fruit trees.  The new septic system has been approved by Peter Kolodziej of Tri-Town Health.  The existing garage will remain and a second garage will be connected to the house.  The house will be 2 ½ stories-33.5 feet high, the ½ story will be upstairs.  A letter of support from the Caplin family, neighbors, was read into the record.  An order of conditions has been issued by the Conservation Commission.

The applicant will be appearing  before the Planning Board after this hearing to discuss the Lake and Pond Overlay, therefore the Selectmen at this time does not have a recommendation from the Planning Board on the is application.  A motion was made by George and seconded by Deb to recommend approval of the application under the Lake and Pond Overlay.  The vote to recommend approval was unanimous.  A motion to continue the hearing until later in the evening so as the applicant could go before the Planning Board for their recommendation on the 6.1.2 portion of the application was made by George Shippey.  A second was received from Deb.  The vote to continue was unanimous.

The Selectmen reopened the hearing.  The recommendation of the Planning Board was read into the read.  The Planning Board recommended approve of the application.  The following findings were made:

(1) The proposed use is in compliance with all provisions and requirements of the ZBL and is in harmony with their general intent and purpose, because the demolition and reconstruction is a permitted use by special permit and is in harmony with the general intent to allow for scrutinized reconstructions of prior nonconforming uses. 

(2) The proposed use is desirable to the public convenience or welfare in that the site is also already being used for the same purpose and the change will enhance the visual appearance of the property and the reconstructed house will increase the tax revenues for the town. 

(3) The proposed use will not be detrimental to adjacent uses or to the established or future character of the neighborhood because; it will improve the septic system with a new enhanced system, which system, unlike the failed system on the property, is more than 100 feet from the abutters' wells and the well serving the subject property, beautify the neighborhood significantly, and is in keeping with the general appearance of the buildings in its vicinity and on the Stockbridge Bowl in general. 

(4) The proposed change will not create undue traffic congestion or unduly impair pedestrian safety. Once again, this site is already being used for the same purpose as proposed and the traffic pattern will not change in any significant manner. 

(5) The proposed change will not overload any public water, drainage or sewer system or any other municipal facility to such an extent that the proposed use or any existing use will be unduly subjected to hazards affecting public health, safety or general welfare. The premises are served by a private water supply and private septic and there is no addition of bedrooms from the current use. 

(6) The reconstruction will not be in greater nonconformity with open space, yard, height, and off-street parking requirements or any other requirement of the ZBL as the lot coverage, front, side and rear yard setbacks, height and parking requirements are within the allowances permitted by the ZBL and as to the setback from the Stockbridge Bowl, the proposed structure is not in greater nonconformity than the existing structure; and furthermore the proposed reconstruction will not be more detrimental than the pre-existing non-conforming structure or use to the neighborhood in that it will be an improvement to the neighborhood to have a beautiful new structure with a new septic system to replace the existing and failing structure and septic system. 

With respect to proposed conditions to be imposed upon the Special Permit, we submit the following to which you may naturally add any others that this proposal may have omitted: 

1. This project may proceed via reconstruction of the demolished pre-existing non-conforming structure. 

2. There shall be no discharge or application of wastewater or any pollutant, fertilizers, pesticides or herbicides. 

A motion to approve the findings and the application as present were made by George.  A second was received from Deb.  The vote to approve the application was unanimous.

Rosalin Levitt of 3 Mahkeenac Heights Road came to the Board to record her formal concerns regarding the run-off problem coming from Yokum Road onto Mahkeenac Heights Road which is eroding her property.  The problem had been occurring prior to her purchase of the property, however it had been corrected.  Ms. Levitt is concerned that after the Ludlow Construction is finished with the installation of the sewer that her problems will be back again.  She wants to make sure that it is not going to happen and had spoken with Mr. Clinton Schneyer who has stated that he will make sure that it is fixed and the erosion will not reoccur.  The Selectmen assured Ms. Levitt 
that Clint will do it.

Nextel continuation was opened.  The applicant, Nextel, stated that they would be taking one slot on the towers and that height drives coverage.  Our consultant stated that if a lower section of the tower would work, why not be on the existing tower at East Street.  Nextel inferred that there was not enough space as previous carriers had used two slots on the tower.  Mr. Maxson also stated that with the two towers, coverage would be efficient.  Nextel satisfactorily answered all questions asked by consultant Mr. Maxson.  In conclusion, Mr. Flynn stated that 150' was needed to meet terms at 30 East Street and at the Sportsmen's Club 15' additional height would be ideal for Nextel.  A letter from Dr. Schwartz was outlined.  Dr. Schwartz thanked the Selectmen for their careful, thoughtful, hard work on behalf of the neighbors and the need for cell service at the 30 East Street property.

The Board of Selectmen acting as the Special Permit Granting Authority made the following findings under Section 6.25 of the Zoning Bylaws:

a.  The proposed antennas for Nextel will satisfy all requirements of section 6.25   except those for which it finds that literal enforcement would have the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services;
b.  The proposed antennas for Nextel is a necessary component of a comprehensive scheme to ensure the provision of personal wireless services in the affected area;
c.  The proposed antennas for Nextel is the means of providing personal wireless services in the affected area that will least intrude upon the Town, and neighborhood in which it is proposed to be located, and adjoining properties;
d.  A good faith effort has been made to identify and evaluate less intrusive alternatives to the proposed facility; and 
e.  The applicant has agreed to implement all reasonable measures to mitigate the potential adverse impacts of the proposed antennas on the Town and neighborhood in which it is proposed to be located and adjoining properties.

The Board of Selectmen also found:
a.  The height of the proposed antennas will be 165 feet;
b.  The tower and antennas are located away from any residential structures;
c.   The tower and antennas are situated in an isolated location behind the Sportsmen's Club;
d. The tower and antennas were placed with the topography of the land including the features of the land that would affect the service;
e.  The tower was placed so that no trees were eliminated;
f.  The antennas at this time cannot be placed on existing structures;
g.  The antennas will be placed on an existing monopole located at the 24 West   Stockbridge site;
h. The antennas will not intrude upon the Town and neighborhood in which it is proposed to be located and adjoining properties to a lesser degree.
i. The Nextel service will benefit the Town and it residents by creating service within      the Town and the surrounding area.

The Board of Selectmen acting as the Special Permit Granting Authority made the following findings under Section 6.3 of the Zoning Bylaws:

a. The application is in compliance with all provisions and requirements of this Bylaw, and in harmony with its general intent and purpose;
b. The application is essential and desirable to the public convenience or welfare at the proposed location as it will provide coverage within Town;
c.The application will not be detrimental to adjacent uses or to the established or future character of the neighborhood; 
d. The application will not create undue traffic congestion or unduly impair pedestrian safety as the tower and the antennas will be located within the woodlands;
e. The application will not overload any public water, drainage, or sewer system or any other municipal facility to such an extent that the proposed use of any existing use in the immediate area or in any other area of the town will be unduly subjected to the hazards affecting public health, safety or general welfare.

A motion was made by George to approve the application for a 150 foot flag pole tower with a compound.  Nextel will only take one slot which will leave three for other carriers and that the consultant, Broadcast Signal Lab prior to obtaining a building permit.  A second was made by Deb.  The vote to approve the Nextel application with conditions at the 30 East Street site was unanimous.

The following findings and approval is for the 24 West Stockbridge Road site for Nextel. 
The Board of Selectmen acting as the Special Permit Granting Authority made the following  findings under Section 6.25 of the Zoning Bylaws:

a.  The proposed antennas for Nextel will satisfy all requirements of section 6.25   except those for which it finds that literal enforcement would have the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services;
b.  The proposed antennas for Nextel is a necessary component of a comprehensive scheme to ensure the provision of personal wireless services in the affected area;
c.  The proposed antennas for Nextel is the means of providing personal wireless services in the affected area that will least intrude upon the Town, and neighborhood in which it is proposed to be located, and adjoining properties;
d.  A good faith effort has been made to identify and evaluate less intrusive alternatives to the proposed facility; and 
e.  The applicant has agreed to implement all reasonable measures to mitigate the potential adverse impacts of the proposed antennas on the Town and neighborhood in which it is proposed to be located and adjoining properties.

The Board of Selectmen also found:
a.  The height of the proposed antennas will be 165 feet;
b.  The tower and antennas are located away from any residential structures;
c.   The tower and antennas are situated in an isolated location behind the Sportsmen's Club;
d. The tower and antennas were placed with the topography of the land including the features of the land that would affect the service;
e.  The tower was placed so that no trees were eliminated;
f.  The antennas at this time cannot be placed on existing structures;
g.  The antennas will be placed on an existing monopole located at the 24 West   Stockbridge site;
h. The antennas will not intrude upon the Town and neighborhood in which it is proposed to be located and adjoining properties to a lesser degree.
i. The Nextel service will benefit the Town and it residents by creating service within      the Town and the surrounding area.

The Board of Selectmen acting as the Special Permit Granting Authority made the following findings under Section 6.3 of the Zoning Bylaws:

a. The application is in compliance with all provisions and requirements of this Bylaw, and in harmony with its general intent and purpose;
b. The application is essential and desirable to the public convenience or welfare at the proposed location as it will provide coverage within Town;
c.The application will not be detrimental to adjacent uses or to the established or future character of the neighborhood; 
d. The application will not create undue traffic congestion or unduly impair pedestrian safety as the tower and the antennas will be located within the woodlands;
e. Not applicable

A motion was made by George to approve the application for a 15 foot addition to the existing tower with the antenna at 10 feet spacing.  A second was made by Deb.  The vote to approve the Nextel application for extending the existing tower 15 feet and the construction of a  12 foot by 20 foot shelter adjacent to the tower at 24 West Stockbridge Road, property of the Stockbridge Sportsmen's Club, was unanimous.

Jason Krzanowski, Civil Engineer from Hill Engineering came before the Board for a special permit review under Section 6.5 for Daniel Levinson, 23 Mahkeenac Road.  Mr. Levinson wishes to construct a small deck on the lake side of the house and a two story addition on the east side of the house, within 150' of the mean high water mark of the Stockbridge Bowl.  Mr. Krzanowski had been to see the Planning Board this evening.  The Planning Board had some issues so they have continued the hearing.  The Selectmen did not make a recommendation waiting to hear what the property owner decides regarding the concerns from the Planning Board.

A request was made to the Selectmen from the Fitzpatrick Company Employees to place a bench similar to the ones on Main Street across from the Red Lion Inn in honor of the 60th wedding anniversary of Jane and Jack Fitzpatrick.  The employees would like to place a small plaque with the inscription "In honor of Jane and Jack Fitzpatrick, September 7, 2004.  George made a motion to allow the Fitzpatrick Company Employees to place the bench across the street from the Red Lion Inn.  A second was received from Deb.  The vote was unanimous.

A compliment was made to St. Paul's Church who had taken down the hedge and done landscaping around the yard.  St. Paul's looks gorgeous.

The Selectmen unanimously appointed William J. DeSantis of Lee as a special police officer in Stockbridge.

The Town of Stockbridge received congratulations from DEP for another successful year of recycling.  The Town received a rebate check in the amount of $1,439.95.

Deb made a motion to declare the Youth Building on Shamrock Street and the 2002 Police Cruiser as surplus property.  A second was received from George.  The vote was unanimous.  Cris explained that in order to sell either the Youth Building or the 2002 Police Cruiser the Selectmen needed to declare them surplus.

With no other business, George made a motion to adjourn.  Deb seconded the motion.  The vote to adjourn at 9:00 p.m. was unanimous.

			A true copy, ATTEST:

September 13, 2004

Present:  Cris Irsfeld, Deb McMenamy, George Shippey, Attorney Kenneth Shearn, Attorney Philip Heller, Christina Alsop, Greg Juskalian, Rob Harrison-Blue Line Design, Ethan Kelly-Berkshire Record, Edgar Chamorro-CTSB, John Jolls and Richard Messer-Weston and Sampson and Jorja Marsden

The Alsop Special Permit Hearing which was continued from August 9 was first on the agenda.  Attorney Philip Heller stated that he wished to modify the application for the permit.  The modification would be for one apartment in the mill Building and modify the floor plan of the apartment to contain four rooms, two bedrooms on the second floor and a kitchen and living room on the first level located to the west side of the Mill Building.  The space not occupied by the apartment will remain a vacant space.  There would not be any B& B use in the Mill Building.  Attorney Heller continued by saying that this request is pursuant to section 6.1.2 to change, alter and reconstruct a preexisting, nonconforming structure, a two story historic Mill Building to allow for the apartment use.  The apartment use is consistent with a special permit granted in 1990 and a building permit dated Jul 18, 1992.  The applicant intends to operate a five room B&B in the legal residence as a by-right use under section 4.11.b.3.  The modification comes from objections given by the Planning Board.  Rob Harrison, Blue Line Design, explained the new plans showing the modifications.

Cris read the recommendation from Town Counsel, Raymond Miyares regarding the modifications.  Town Counsel's comments are as follows: 1. It now appears that the existing apartment on the premises qualifies as a preexisting nonconforming use of the premises since the applicant does not hold a special permit from the Planning Board as currently required by section 4.11.A.4.4 of the Bylaws.  In addition, the building at issue is a pre-existing non-conforming structure.  2.  Any change of use or alteration of the structure requires a special permit under section 6.1.2. of the bylaws, except as provided within section 6.1.1.c.  3.  The existing lawful use of the existing structure appears to be as a barn with a two-room apartment.  Since the building does not appear to be a "one-family or two-family structure," the exception provided in section 6.1.1.c does not apply,
And the proposed change does require a Special Permit.  4.  Pursuant to section 6.1.2, the Board of Selectmen may authorize the proposed change of use and alteration of the structure if (1) they "will not be in greater nonconformity with open space, yard and off-street parking requirements or any other requirement" of the Zoning Bylaws; and (2) the Selectmen find that they "will not be more detrimental than the pre-existing nonconforming structure or use to the neighborhood."  5.  Section 6.1.2 includes three examples that "shall be deemed not to be in greater nonconformity with open space and yard requirements," but none apply this application. In particular, section 6.1.2.c does not apply because the Applicant is proposing to add a deck that will be "closer to the lot line…than the closes point of the existing structure."  6.  However, the fact that none of the three examples set forth in section 6.1.2  is applicable does not prevent the Board of Selectmen from making a finding that the proposed use and alteration "will not be in greater nonconformity with open space [and] yard …requirements" if, in fact, all applicable requirements are satisfied.  7.  As noted in my August 6 letter, in determining whether the proposed use and alteration "will…be more detrimental than the pre-existing nonconforming structure or use to the neighborhood,"  the Board should compare the proposed use (four-room apartment and unoccupied space) to existing lawful uses of the building (barn and two-room apartment), if any.   8.   Any Special Permit issued pursuant to section 6.1.2. should be conditioned on the Applicant's also obtaining a Special Permit pursuant to section 4.11.A.4.4.   9.  The Applicant's intent to operate a Bed and Breakfast in her legal residence as a by-right use is not properly before the Board of Selectmen in this proceeding.  At an appropriate time, the Building Inspector will need to determine whether such Bed and Breakfast qualifies as a by-right accessory use.

The Planning Board's recommendation dated August 7, stated that after a lengthy discussion, the Board voted to recommend that the Selectmen deny the application as submitted for a five-room bed and breakfast, in addition to a two-room apartment in two buildings at 8 Yale Hill Road, based on the fact that it is an over intensification of use on a small lot in the center of town and the fact that there is presently no permitted use at all for the barn/mill structure.  Attorney Kenneth Shearn, representing the Davies, abutters to Alsop property stated that it is not a pre-existing, non-conforming legal apartment.  Attorney Heller stated that it is a legal two-bedroom apartment.  Cris asked Attorney Heller how to cure what had been done without proper permitting.  Letters from abutters were read;  Deb read a letter in support from Susan Merrill, Cris read a letter from a group of neighbors who were against the application and George read a letter from the Davies direct abutters who were also against the application.  Attorney Shearn spoke against the application from an email that was received from John Davies.  Attorney Shearn continued by stating that the property has multiple uses, one driveway which is small and serves both the Davies and Cochrane properties, and Alsops.  With a two suite apartment, a Bed and Breakfast business and the regular parties traveling to their homes, the driveway will be congested.  Cris stated that with four separate rooms with baths the appearance screams out four separate units.  Robert Harrison felt that by taking out bathrooms, than the appearance would not be that there were four separate units.  Harrison continued to say that the mill should be maintained to keep it from becoming in disrepair.

Deb suggested that a site visit be made.  A site visit was scheduled for Tuesday, September 21 at 12:00 at Christina's.  A motion to continue the hearing until after the applicant went to the Planning Board with the modification request was made by George.  A second was received from Deb.  The vote to continue was unanimous.

Jack Jolls and Richard Messer of Weston and Sampson, engineering firm from Glastonbury, CT came before the Selectmen to explain the revision scope of services for the Comprehensive Site Assessment for the Glendale Middle Road Landfill.  The DEP has stated that extra work needs to be done with regard to the closing of the landfill.  The DEP is requesting additional information regarding leachate, cap permeability, soil gas migration, and the limits of refuse at the landfill.  Each aspect of the additional information was reviewed.  After discussion regarding the method and price of the proposal, Weston and Sampson said that they would review the proposed compensation and get back to the Board before the next meeting.

George made motion to adjourn at 8:10 p.m.  A second was received from Deb.  The vote to adjourn was unanimous.

			A true copy, ATTEST:

September 16, 2004

Present:  Cris Irsfeld, Deb McMenamy, George Shippey, Gary Kleinerman, R.J. McDonald, Cris Raymond, Peggy Riser, and Joan Kopperl and Jorja Marsden

Cris opened the meeting with stating that we will be working on the Board Access.  Through the help of Smitty Pignetelli, the pads to fix the ramp will be brought to the Berkshire from the Access Board property.  Clint will be fixing the ramp as the Access Board does not have funding.

R.J. McDonald a member of the recently formed Strategic Planning Committee a subcommittee of The Stockbridge Bowl Association handed out some material gathered regarding Stockbridge Bowl.  The committee was formed to assure the implementation of the Lake Management Program.  ENSR International has been studying the Stockbridge Bowl and the milfoil since the 1940's.   The Strategic Planning Committee will be working closely with the Town, and state officials and other of interest to assure the future of Stockbridge Bowl.  The Town will have to apply for all the permits etc.  The Committee pointed out that this project would be very expensive per Ken Wagner of ENSR is could add up to $2 million dollars.  The financial burden would have to be met by the entire Town.

				A true copy, ATTEST:

 

September 20, 2004

Present:  Cris Irsfeld, Deb McMenamy, George Shippey, Mary Allen, Craig Berger, D. R. Bahlman-Berk. Eagle, Attorney Philip Heller-DeBolina LLC,  Richard L. Chorney-Pres. & CEO Grove School, George Olshin-Professor of Special Education/So. Connecticut State University and Consultant to Grove School, Colin Davies-Asst Director Grove School, Rob Hoogs, Foresight Land Services-Grove School, C.F. Roman, Irving Kronenberg, Ron Broucker, Steven Schmitter, Lynn Schmitter, Charlie Kenny, Barbara Kenny, Judy Goudey, Don Goudey, Barbara Mandell, Belle Fox-Martin, Laurie Norton Moffatt, Attorney Richard A. Simons for Mohawk Brook Preserve, Craig Moffatt, Robert Phaneuf, Ned Baldwin, Marjorie Kingston, CTSB and Jorja Marsden

The legal notice for the special permit hearing of DeBolina LLC was read.  An application for DeBolina, LLC, Richard L. Chorney, The Grove School, has been submitted by Attorney Philip F. Heller, for property at 37 Interlaken Road, to operate a private, for-profit residential care facility, a therapeutic boarding school and activity center for adolescents with emotional issues, on property now occupied by DeSisto School.  The property contains approximately 220 acres with 1,058 feet of frontage on Route 183.  The property is located in the R-2 zone.  Application is made under 4.11.A.10.  

Attorney Philip Heller introduced the principals regarding the public hearing for DeBolina LLC.  A brief history and description of the school was given by Attorney Heller was given.  A range of letters of support came from Chief of Police Paul Jakubson, George M. Olshin, Professor of Special Education, and various parents of students at the Grove School.  The Planning Board recommended approval under Section 4.11.A.10 after discussion about impacts on the neighborhood and the Town.

Rob Hoogs, Foresight, explained that the front of the property is in an R-2 and the rear of the property is in the R-4 zone.  The property has 1000 feet of frontage, has 12 buildings and the lot coverage is less than 1%.  The property has municipal water and sewer.  The previous occupants used approximately 7000 cubic feet of water and it is projected that the Grove School would use less on the average of 6500 per day as they would have less students.  The sewer needs work and will be upgraded.

Richard Chorney discussed the philosophy of the school, stated that the rear of the property possibly could be used for nature activities and even possibly for wounded animals.  It is a twelve month school, with four 2 1/2  week vacations.  Mr. Chorney stated that it would be possible for 10 to 15 students to be off campus at a time and be within the community.  He continued that they have an open campus where students could go home if they wish.  They would be hiring staff from within the community.

Mr. Chorney thought that the closing of the property might be at the end of October.  
A possible time line for the opening of the school would be January if the work to the buildings were done or else possibly in April.  

Jack Spencer asked the reason why the application is under 4.11.A. 10, Health Care Facility.  Mr. Chorney replied that the operation is for a private, for-profit care facility, a therapeutic boarding school and activity center for adolescents with emotional issues.  Attorney Heller stated that the Grove School would be paying taxes which would equal approximately $25,000.00 at the current tax rate.  Attorney Heller stated that if they changed their scope the applicant understands that they would have filed a new special permit. Craig Berger asked about how many students would be attending the school and how many staff.  The reply was that currently they project to have approximately 185 people which would break down to about 140 students to 45 staff.  Another concern was the possibility of development.  The buildings are in need of repair however at this time there are not plans for developing or building more buildings within the campus.  Another important concern from the abutters was the mountain that is the background for the campus.  DeBolina LLC and the Board of Selectmen will be entering into an agreement which is not part of the special permit process to place a portion of the property located along the westerly boundary into a Conservation Restriction.  The neighbors and the Selectmen want to have included within this portion, the slope and the water shed so to protect the area.

With no further discussion, the Board of Selectmen voted the following findings under the Zoning Bylaw Section 6.1.2 

a.  It is in compliance with all provisions and requirements of the bylaw and in harmony with its general intent and purposes.  A Health Care Facility is allowed by special permit pursuant to Section 4.11.A.l 0 of the zoning bylaw.  The proposed use by the applicant. Is consistent with the definition of Health Care Facility under Section 2, Definitions, of the bylaw in that the facility is a private institution, principally engaged in providing services for health maintenance and the treatment of mental conditions (emotional issues) in a residential care facility.   Additionally,  Section 1.3, Purposes, of the bylaw provides in part that the objectives of the bylaw are: 

"a.   To prevent overcrowding of land;
  b.   To conserve the value of land and buildings; 
  c.   Minimize the adverse effect of development on the town's unique  environmental and historic features." 

The proposed use will ensure that the approximately 220 acres of prime Stockbridge real estate will continue to operate as a campus with large open spaces, as it has since 1955 when the property was occupied by The Stockbridge School.

b.   It is essential or desirable to the public convenience or welfare at the proposed 
location.  The proposed use is desirable to the public welfare in that the present site containing approximately 220 acres will continue to operate as a campus with large open spaces and large building setbacks from Route 183. The Main House is set back 510 feet from Route 183, and the closest building to Route 183 is set back 440 feet. The facility the applicant intends to operate is a for-profit facility which will pay real estate taxes to the town. At the current tax rate and assessed 
value the taxes would be approximately $25,000.00. The applicant intends to hire a work force in all ranges of skill and salary, which will be beneficial to the public.  A high quality therapeutic facility for adolescents is desirable to the public convenience at this location. 

     c.   The proposal will not be detrimental to adjacent uses or to the established or future 
character of the neighborhood. An educational/therapeutic campus facility has been operating at the present location since 1955 when The Stockbridge School was established.  For the past forty-nine years the past and present neighborhood has co-existed with the campus use. The established and future character of the neighborhood will not be impacted by the continuation of this use. The 
applicant' s current facility, The Grove School in Madison, Connecticut, established in 1934, has a reputation for high quality. Letters of reference were received from Paul D. Jakubson, Madison Chief of Police, George M. Olshin, Professor of Special Education at Southern Connecticut State University, and 
former and current parents of Grove School children. 

     d.    The proposed will not create undue traffic congestion or unduly impair pedestrian 
safety.  The use of the property will not change dramatically from the present use. 

e.    The proposed use will not overload any public water drainage or sewer systems.                            
property is served by town water and sewer, and there will not be an appreciable increase in capacity. 

Deb made a motion to approve the special permit as presented with the condition that the Agreement to be entered in between DeBolina LLC and the Town of Stockbridge, section 4 means the westerly boundary which will include the slope of the mountain.  A second was received by George.  The vote to approve the application with the findings and the condition to include the slope of the land with number 4 of the Agreement was unanimous.

The Selectmen have been informed that through the help of Smitty Pignetelli, the public access at Stockbridge Bowl will be fixed by Clint Schneyer.  The Public Access Board does not have the monies to fix the ramp but do have the pads that are needed to fix it.  Smitty has arranged to have the pads brought from the Public Access facility to Stockbridge so that Clint could install them.  With the new drawdown dates of October 15 to November 30, hopefully the pads will arrive and Clint could pour cement and install the pads.  It was announced that the Public Access boat ramp will be closed while repairs are being made and that anyone with a boat on the lake that needs to remove it should do so as soon as possible.

Attorney Philip Heller and Stanley Rosen came before the Board with a use permit regarding property at 70 Interlaken Road.  Mr. Rosen and his daughter Courtney Vining would like to purchase property from DeSisto School at 70 Interlaken Road.  They would like to convert the two-story building with a three apartments into a five room Bed and Breakfast pursuant to Section 4.11.B.3 of the Bylaw and retain the pre-existing, multi-family use in the one-story two apartment building.  Fourteen parking spaces will be provided in accordance with Section 6.2.1. of the bylaw.  Attorney Philip Heller placed conditions on the use permit as follows:

Two Story building with three apartments.  This pre-existing, non-conforming, multi-family use building will be converted to a Single Family Dwelling, will be occupied as the owner's principal legal residence by Courtney V. Vining and will operate as a five room Bed and Breakfast pursuant to Section 4.11.b.2 of the Zoning Bylaws.
One Story, two apartment building.  This pre-existing, non-conforming, multi-family use will continue as a two apartment building and will not be occupied by the owner of the two story residence.

George made a motion to approve the Use Permit with the two conditions.   A second was received from Deb.  The vote to approve the Use Permit with the following conditions:
1.   Two Story building with three apartments.  This pre-existing, non-conforming, multi- family use building will be converted to a Single Family Dwelling, will be occupied as the owner's principal legal residence by Courtney V. Vining and will operate as a five room Bed and Breakfast pursuant to Section 4.11.b.2 of the Zoning Bylaws.
One Story, two-apartment building.  This pre-existing, non-conforming, multi-family use will continue as a two apartment building and will not be occupied by the owner of the two story residence.

was unanimous. 

Ray Levesque of R Levesque Associates, LLC representing Stone Ridge Associates, LLC property at Dugway Road came before the Board to review the Lake and Pond Overlay special permit application which is before the Planning Board.  Stone Ridge Associates, LLC wish to construct an entrance road and associated drainage improvements, within 150' of the mean high water mark of Mohawk Brook.  The property is located in the R-4 zone.  Mr. Levesque gave a site description overview.  The road would be oil and stone therefore the soil would not erode, and where the soil would be disrupted, there is a plan in place to revegetated.  Attorney Richard Simons for the abutters stated that it was a complicated permit and that the Planning Board was hiring a consultant and that he felt that the Selectmen didn't have the information to make a recommendation.  He continued by saying that the Selectmen should be able to hear what the consultant says on behalf of the Town.  George stated that Conservation Commission had an expert, and that the LPOD mirrors what was before the Conservation Commission.  Cris stated that this a tough project however it is the charge of the Selectmen only to review the Lake and Pond Overlay not the whole project.  Deb wanted to receive another opinion regarding the project.  It was decided to ask the Planning Board for a time line.  A motion was made by Deb to continue the hearing until October 18, 2004.  A second was made by George.  The vote to continue was unanimous.

George Shippey made a motion to accept Weston and Sampson's new proposal for $18,900.00 for the extra scope of works for the Landfill project.  A second was received from Deb.  The vote to accept the proposal of $18,900.00 for Weston and Sampson was unanimous.

With no other business, the meeting adjourned at 9:25 p.m.

						A true copy, ATTEST: