image description
An illustration of a proposed 77-room hotel proposed for the so-called Lehovic property.
image description

Another Hotel Proposal Heads to Williamstown's Town Hall

By Stephen DravisiBerkshires Staff
Print Story | Email Story
WILLIAMSTOWN, Mass. — A local motel owner is asking the town for permission to develop a new three-story, 77-room hotel on Main Street.
 
Vipul "Vinny" Patel, who owns the Northside Motel on North Street, will be in front of the Conservation Commission and the Zoning Board of Appeals this month to seek four special permits that will allow him to develop the new hotel at 562 Main St. (Route 7), the site commonly known as the Lehovec property.
 
Patel's attorney and representatives of engineering firm Guntlow & Associates previewed the proposal for neighboring residents at an informal meeting last Thursday.
 
Attorney Donald Dubendorf said Friday that designers have taken pains to minimize the visual impact of the three-story structure, which would develop an empty parcel that was in the news in recent years because of the Fire District's efforts to acquire it for a new fire station.
 
The main enabling special permit is the one required under town bylaws to allow a hotel on a property in the Limited Business zoning district. Part of the Lehovec Property is in the business zone; the eastern third of it is in the residential zone and would be developed.
 
Developers are also seeking a determination from the town that the increased impervious area in the zone will not adversely impact the Wellhead Protection District that the property occupies. They are seeking relief from some interior planting provisions in the bylaw. And they are asking for a waiver from the maximum height allowable under town law.
 
"A flat roof on the (three-story) building would comply," Dubendorf said, referring to the town's general 35-foot height limit. "But we wanted to design gable roofs, which satisfies the aesthetic and visual impact sections of the bylaw. It's 43 feet to the midpoint of the highest roof."
 
The building’s proposed gables and dormers are strictly aesthetic elements that serve no function, Dubendorf said.
 
And while the building’s maximum height does exceed the town’s code, that impact is mitigated by the fact that its starting elevation is 6 feet below the elevation at the curb.
 
The building sits back 110 feet from that curb, which exceeds the minimum setback and is farther back than the next-door Aubuchon building (formerly Agway).
 
As for stormwater runoff, Guntlow's Charlie LaBatt said he is happy with the results of soil permeability tests he has conducted on the property and most of its stormwater "won't leave the site." To help address those concerns, designers have planned two rain gardens on the property to the west of the planned hotel.
 
Questions about runoff are likely to be raised by neighbors from nearby Colonial Village when public hearings are held before the Conservation Commission on Thursday, April 13, and one week later before the Zoning Board of Appeals. Residents of that neighborhood strongly objected to a separate hotel development that was proposed and ultimately permitted for the Developer Finance (former Grand Union) site farther east on Main Street.
 
Dubendorf said the developers had met one-on-one with some of the neighbors and had incorporated some design changes based on those meetings in advance of filing applications with the town on Friday.
 
He characterized the meeting with residents the night before as "cordial" and the attendees as "curious" about the project.
 
"I didn’t get a sense of any hostility," Dubendorf said.
 
One of the Colonial Village residents in attendance agreed in part with that assessment.
 
"I would agree that it wasn't hostile, but I would describe it as concerned as opposed to curious," Robert Kavanaugh of Colonial Avenue wrote in response to an email seeking comment. "There were a lot of questions about impact, e.g., run-off and flooding in a location that already has that problem, size of the building and impact on neighbors viewshed, nighttime lighting from the parking area and the hotel rooms."
 
Kavenaugh said he expects those same issues to be raised in front of town boards over the next couple of weeks.
 
"I would think that Colonial Village residents will be at both meetings to express their concerns," he wrote.
 
Dubendorf said if the hotel is approved, Patel plans to seek a partnership with one of the large hotel chains currently missing from the Williamstown market. Although his client operates a "mom and pop" motel currently, Patel realizes the industry is changing and potential guests are drawn to the kind of franchised properties currently popping up in Pittsfield and South County.
 
Dubendorf said the rule of thumb the town uses for assessing new hotels is $50,000 of value per room. At 77 rooms, the proposed hotel would be valued at about $3.9 million with an annual tax bill of about $60,800 at the current rate of $15.79 per $1,000 of assessed value.
 
The 3.7-acre Lehovec Property is listed on the town's website with an assessed value of $382,800.

Tags: motels, hotels,   

If you would like to contribute information on this article, contact us at info@iberkshires.com.

Williamstown Charter Review Panel OKs Fix to Address 'Separation of Powers' Concern

By Stephen DravisiBerkshires Staff
WILLIAMSTOWN, Mass. — The Charter Review Committee on Wednesday voted unanimously to endorse an amended version of the compliance provision it drafted to be added to the Town Charter.
 
The committee accepted language designed to meet concerns raised by the Planning Board about separation of powers under the charter.
 
The committee's original compliance language — Article 32 on the annual town meeting warrant — would have made the Select Board responsible for determining a remedy if any other town board or committee violated the charter.
 
The Planning Board objected to that notion, pointing out that it would give one elected body in town some authority over another.
 
On Wednesday, Charter Review Committee co-Chairs Andrew Hogeland and Jeffrey Johnson, both members of the Select Board, brought their colleagues amended language that, in essence, gives authority to enforce charter compliance by a board to its appointing authority.
 
For example, the Select Board would have authority to determine a remedy if, say, the Community Preservation Committee somehow violated the charter. And the voters, who elect the Planning Board, would have ultimate say if that body violates the charter.
 
In reality, the charter says very little about what town boards and committees — other than the Select Board — can or cannot do, and the powers of bodies like the Planning Board are regulated by state law.
 
View Full Story

More Williamstown Stories