In a report published by the Berkshire Eagle on January 26, 2026, the attorney for the developers, Jonathan Silverstein, is quoted as follows:

“The clear intent of project opponents, who continue to urge the Board to require a ‘new’ special permit, is to defeat the project by making the review process prohibitively expensive and lengthy,”

That statement is categorically false.

Below, a letter from one near-abutter to Elm Court, who has advocated for the preservation of Stockbridge’s historic & environmental resources across several decades. As submitted to the Board of Selectmen on January 31, her letter provides accurate background for where we find ourselves today:

My husband and I are full time Stockbridge residents who have lived on Old Stockbridge Road near the Elm Court estate since 1998. We have watched the estate transition from an abandoned, vandalized mansion to a family home – and now to a proposed massive resort hotel.

Twenty years ago, Robert Berle, the great-great grandson of the original owner, and his wife, Sonya, asked the town to change the bylaw to permit a 18-room boutique hotel. We, along with most others, voted at Town Meeting to allow this use. We were thankful that the Berles were renovating the mansion, and we enjoyed some of the events that they graciously hosted.

Unfortunately, they couldn’t make a go of it. In 2012 Amstar, AKA Front Yard, the new owner, met with the Stockbridge selectboard to write an amendment to the existing Cottage Era Estate bylaw that would allow for a larger resort hotel. 

This proposal included an Annex and Spa connected to the mansion by a corridor thereby increasing the total size of the hotel to 110,000 square feet. No other buildings were proposed.  Most people thought the plan would entail just the one building. At Town Meeting, when I asked the developer’s lawyer, if negotiation to reduce the scope of their project is possible, he promised that there would be “plenty of time” to address the size and scale.  Sadly, there was never an opportunity for that discussion.

The amendment passed but a special permit was still required. There was plenty of vocal and written opposition. A letter objecting to the size of the project and its impact on our residential neighborhood, and signed by 110 residents, was submitted. After three hearings, the Stockbridge selectboard voted for the proposal. Next came special hearings in Lenox town boards. The proposal passed the by one vote. But a group of abutters and neighbors, incensed by the lack of communication between them and the town boards, brought a lawsuit to Land Court. The suit was dismissed. But the developers, unable to secure financing, never broke ground. 

Fast forward to 2025. The current owners have proposed a plan actually much larger than the original. Instead of disturbing 10 acres under the old plan, 40 acres would be disrupted under the new. Instead of a single structure they propose building 12 hotel buildings and 38 individual houses – 50 separate structures requiring hundreds of feet of extra roads and driveways.

Before 2002, the Elm Court 89-acre property was subject to four-acre zoning which meant only 17 new houses would have been permitted. The purpose of 4-acre zoning was, and is, to help preserve the rural character of the town while conserving open space. Similarly, the purpose of the Bylaw was to preserve the historic architecture and landscape of our great estates by allowing for adaptive reuse. The loss of habitat required to build 50 buildings is immense. It is ironic that the new owners claim to be conserving nature (mostly wetlands) while in fact aiding its destruction by earmarking for development 25 acres of currently pristine land.

This oversized development might be appropriate in a suburban setting, but it will not enhance the landscape; and it will most certainly change the rural character of our town. 

It is now over 11 years since the special permit was passed. A lot has changed. This new proposal needs to be carefully discussed by town residents and neighbors as well as reviewed by our town boards and commissions.  

Julie Edmonds

Obviously, it is in the public interest that such a massive development proposal situated in such an environmentally sensitive location, while also being surrounded by established residential neighborhoods, receive maximum attention, with careful, thorough review by all qualified boards and commissions, including the state Department of Environmental Protection.

Rushing half-baked plans past a small number of individuals who simply do not have the expertise nor experience to evaluate them would represent willful & capricious indifference to everyone except the developers.

That is their “clear intent”!

And that is NOT in the public interest.

 

˜˜˜˜˜˜