Great Barrington Planning Board Meeting - October 15, 2026: Zoning Amendment on Hotel Room Limit

The Great Barrington Planning Board held a public hearing on a proposed zoning amendment to eliminate the 45-room limit for hotels and motels, as introduced by Select Board member Philip Ornstein. The board discussed the amendment's implications, received public comments, and voted to continue the hearing to December 10, 2026, citing the need for further deliberation and stakeholder engagement.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Eileen (public attendee): Asked whether there have been any recent hotel applications or developer inquiries regarding the amendment, and whether the stalled Searles hotel project suggests a lack of market demand. Planning Board Chair Chris responded that no such inquiries have been received, and declined to speculate on the Searles project.
• James Carzone (84 North Lane Road, online comment): Expressed support for removing the 45-room limit, stating that Great Barrington is in economic distress and that the change could increase business and revenue. Thanked Mr. Ornstein for his transparency.
• Unnamed public attendee (online): Supported the amendment, noting that the special permit process provides adequate protections. The speaker stated they had voted for the 45-room limit years ago but now believe the time has come to open up development, citing personal experience living on a fixed income.

Discussion Items

• Philip Ornstein (Select Board member, proponent): Presented the amendment as a modest change to encourage responsible economic development. He noted that the current 45-room limit, combined with high construction costs and interest rates, effectively prohibits new hotel development in a tourist-dependent town. He clarified that no developer had requested the change and that it is not a quick fix for budget challenges, as any new hotel would take 3–5 years. He emphasized that existing zoning controls (site plan review, special permit, use restrictions in residential zones) remain in place.
• Planning Board Concerns: Members Jackie Keynes and Jeremy Ega expressed that the process felt rushed. They noted the board had been planning to study the issue more thoroughly for the May town meeting, and that the special town meeting timeline deprived them of adequate time for community engagement and analysis of traffic, scale, and character impacts. Chair Brandy Nelton echoed these concerns, stating the Select Board's action was not collaborative and that the Planning Board prefers to be fully informed before supporting zoning changes at town meeting.
• Question on Urgency: Board member Art asked about the urgency of bringing the amendment to the special town meeting. Mr. Ornstein responded that the special meeting was primarily called for a wastewater grant, and the Select Board chose to add several items, including this one, which had been under discussion for over a year. He argued that the amendment is a minor rule change and not a decision on whether the town needs another hotel—that is for developers and guests to decide.
• Procedural Point: A question was raised about whether a defeated zoning article can be reintroduced quickly; it was noted that a two-year latency period may apply, though the town manager confirmed it is two years.

Key Outcomes

• Motion to Continue Hearing: Jackie Keynes moved to continue the public hearing to Thursday, December 10, 2026, at 6:00 PM at Town Hall. The motion was seconded by Jeremy Ega and passed unanimously by voice vote (all present in favor). This action effectively tables the matter for the upcoming special town meeting, as the hearing will not close before then.
• Next Steps: The Planning Board intends to use the intervening time to engage stakeholders and study the implications of removing the 45-room limit, including traffic, infrastructure, and community character.