Owner Michael Deep says the struggling golf course needs the infusion of revenue an inn would provide.

WILLIAMSTOWN, Mass. — The Waubeeka Golf Links zoning bylaw discussion is headed back to the Planning Board.

Town Manager Jason Hoch and Community Development Director Andrew Groff said Tuesday they are drafting an amendment to the bylaw on the annual town meeting warrant, and they hope the Planning Board will use the draft as a basis for discussion starting at its Tuesday, April 12, meeting.

The pair said they believe there still is time to address the concerns of those who oppose the Waubeeka Overlay District, which would enable the golf course to pursue development of a resort hotel that Waubeeka owner Michael Deep hopes will keep the business economically viable.

Hoch hopes to have a more productive dialogue than has taken place since the Planning Board put the brakes on its deliberations in January and Waubeeka's allies put a proposed bylaw on the town meeting warrant by citizen's petition in February. A flurry of emails, letters to the editor and blog postings have sought to rally support for and against the bylaw proposal.

At a public hearing last month, Deep told the Planning Board he would welcome friendly amendments to the bylaw. Hoch pointed out Tuesday that the floor of town meeting is no place to craft such language.

He and Groff hope the Planning Board can use the month between Tuesday and the May 17 annual town meeting to discuss amendments that will satisfy both sides of the dispute.

Planning Board Chairwoman Amy Jeschawitz agrees there is time for a constructive dialogue.

"I'm planning to put it on the agenda," she said on Tuesday. "Will a discussion happen? I don't know. It's going to depend on what the rest of the board wants to do. … I think for the board it's our due diligence to see if we can maybe resolve some of the back and forth that's happening between the voters and Mike Deep, the owner.

"I don't believe we can resolve it in one meeting. If we really want to try to do this and make something happen, we're going to have to meet again. But I can't have a meeting by myself. I have to get everyone else on board — or at least a majority — to buy into doing that."

Deep first came to the Planning Board last summer with a request that it craft a bylaw that would allow a hotel on the site, part of a district that allows only residential development. After several meetings, a 3-2 vote of the Planning Board tabled the issue until Deep could provide several pieces of information, some of which he repeatedly told the board he could not provide at this stage of the process.

That led to the citizen's petition, a method of putting any item before town meeting without the Planning Board's participation.

At a March 15 public hearing, one of the most vocal opponents of the bylaw raised specific objections to the proposal as drafted.

Selectmen and Waubeeka neighbor Andrew Hogeland told the Planning Board on March 15 that the bylaw was flawed and inconsistent with what Deep himself initially proposed to the board.

"I think having an inn down there is great," Hogeland said. "But we're not here for Mike's vision. We're here for a piece of paper. I really wish that the petitioners had given us a petition that was more tailored to what Mike's been talking about."

Specifically, Hogeland objected to: 1. language that allows timeshare development at Waubeeka and at any hotel in town; 2. potential development on up to 40 acres (20 percent) of the Waubeeka property; 3. a requirement that the hotel be built within "the very visible stretch" within 500 feet of Route 7; 4. no requirement that development include a conservation restriction to protect the remainder of the property.

"If the resort fails, this could all be houses," Hogeland said. "If you're here because you think this will preserve open space, it doesn't."

Another oft-heard criticism is that the bylaw as written does not restrict the number of rooms for a potential hotel.

"The opposition documents have been helpful in framing the discussion about issues that need to be addressed," Groff said on Tuesday.

On March 20, five days after the Planning Board's public hearing, Deep wrote Selectman Ronald Turbin an email in which he outlined several amendments he would welcome if it meant winning the approval of the Board of Selectmen.

Deep said he would be willing to work with the town on language that would limit the timeshare development to the overlay district rather than changing the definition that applies to the rest of the town's district. On Monday night, he said that he thinks the timeshare — or fractional ownership — portion of a potential development could be limited to as little as 25 percent.

In the email to Turbin, Deep wrote that he would welcome a cap of 120 rooms at most and that he was willing to significantly shrink the size of the building envelope.

"We could increase the request for open space to 95 percent, or 10 acres, available for development/190 acres open space, with reasonable deference to a proposed developers input and calculation of the number 10," Deep wrote. "Flexibility is the issue here."

Deep and his attorney, Stanley Parese, have repeatedly pointed out that even at 80 percent, the bylaw would allow far less development than currently allowed on the site if it was converted from a golf course to residential development — as is allowed by right under existing bylaws. A hotel would be allowed only by special permit according to the bylaw as drafted.

Deep told Turbin that the 500-foot setback was included in the bylaw because that was what had been discussed in Planning Board meetings. He did not want readers of the bylaw to accuse him of a "bait and switch." But he is not married to the 500-foot restriction, and suggested in his email that a 2,500-foot limit (maintaining the 10-acre building envelope) would allow a hotel to be built on the site of the golf course's driving range.

As for the conservation restriction idea, that has been called a "non-starter" by Deep's attorney, and Deep indicated no desire to compromise on the point in his March 20 email.

"Since we could change the 80 percent rule to 95 percent, we would make it easier for the Town to easily enforce any violation of the provision," Deep wrote. "I am not sure what the future will hold 50 years from today, we should not lock out our options.

"We believe the current version of the bylaw is absolutely clear that as long as there is a hotel in the Waubeeka Overlay District, no houses will be permitted to be built."

No one can change the language of a town meeting article resulting from a citizen's petition prior to the meeting. But that does not preclude interested parties from compromising on an amendment that could be introduced on the floor of the meeting.

The Board of Selectmen is scheduled to vote its recommendations on all the town meeting warrant articles at its Monday, April 11, meeting. Hoch said he is going to suggest that the board table its consideration of the Waubeeka Overlay bylaw until the Planning Board has a chance to consider possible amendments.

Bylaw changes require a two-third majority vote at town meeting.

• Most Read

• Most Comments

• All News

• Events at Williams

• Photos