The controversial Hyatt Place hotel project in Amherst is moving forward despite protests from more than 60 red-clad Snyder residents who showed up at Town Hall on Tuesday night to protest the proximity of the six-story hotel to their neighborhood.
After a month’s delay and a marathon session of the Amherst Zoning Board of Appeals that ran for more than five hours, the board approved all nine of Iskalo Development’s variance requests, which ranged from parking to signage associated with the hotel. The variance to raise the building height limit passed narrowly, 3-2, with Chairman Matthew Plunkett and board member David Pollack voting no.
The few dozen residents who hung on until nearly 12:30 a.m. to hear the final votes of the board left quietly, though a few muttered “shame on you” as they exited.
Richard Berger, the lawyer representing the residents, expressed his disappointment in the decisions.
“The human environment has to be considered,” he said, “and it wasn’t considered at all.”
The project, which has stirred renewed debate about the town’s 65-foot height limit for commercial properties, is now expected to go to the Amherst Planning Board on March 21 for final site plan approval.
The $15 million, 137-room Hyatt Place would go up behind the Lord Amherst Hotel, on the northwest side of the Main Street-Youngmann Highway interchange.
Paul Bohdan Iskalo, head of Iskalo Development, said the Zoning Board’s votes validates what his company has been saying about the project and its appropriateness for the location.
“Those opposed to the project have unfortunately put out a lot of inaccurate information,” he said afterward. “This vote has validated our feeling that this project is consistent with the comprehensive master plan.”
Many opponents pleaded with the board Tuesday to take into consideration the needs of the community and to embrace their power to set limits as guardians of the town.
“You have the power to say no,” said former Zoning Board member Debra Norton. “Why in God’s name wouldn’t you do it?”
Many residents said they were “disgusted,” angry and sorry to have to “beg” the board for consideration. Several also said they were saddened that Iskalo Development, which has created attractive and sensitive community projects elsewhere in Amherst, has refused to consider scaling back the Hyatt Place project despite repeated neighborhood pleas.
“Even one floor would be something,” said Livingston Parkway resident James Reynolds. “Obviously, we would love a three-story – I would love a two-story – building. But every story less than that six is significant to us.”
He urged the Zoning Board to deny Iskalo’s variance requests to give neighborhood residents more leverage to negotiate for a smaller project.
Iskalo told the board that the Hyatt Place project will strengthen the Main Street economy and save and restore the Lord Amherst Hotel. The current project is more modest than what could have been built had his company decided to raze the Lord Amherst and build something larger, he said.
“I recognize that nothing I’ve stated here tonight will change the opinion opponents have about the project, or Iskalo Development for that matter,” he said. “All we can do as an organization is put forth the best hospitality campus it can possibly be.”
Though many of the variances were related to minor parking and signage issues, opponents strongly objected to raising the 65-foot building height restriction and replacing natural berms at the edge of the property along Interstate 290 with parking spaces and sound barriers.
The height variance requested would raise the 65-foot building height restriction to 77 feet, 4 inches, to accommodate a signature hotel roofline feature at the front of the building facing the I-290.
“It’s the equivalent of the McDonald’s golden arches, if you will,” said Iskalo Vice President David Chiazza.
If the signature roofline is permitted, Chiazza said, the company would not install a mechanical shed on the top of the building, which would be more objectionable to residents.
Residents criticized the developer for threatening to install a mechanical shed on the roof, and use it as a bargaining chip to get the building height variance.
“I think it will alter the character of the neighborhood,” Plunkett said in explaining his no vote.
Berger, representing the neighborhood residents, said the hotel will sit on a higher slope than nearby Livingston Parkway, where many of the residents live near Mike’s Pond.
Many residents also expressed concern about the salt, oil and other run-off that might enter the pond and harm the wildlife there. Hopkins responded that the developer has already submitted reports regarding storm water quality control efforts on this matter.
The board had delayed action on the variances at its Jan. 15 meeting because an environmental impact review of the project was incomplete.
Lawyer Sean Hopkins, who is representing the developer, spent more than 20 minutes attempting to deconstruct and refute all allegations regarding the project’s potentially negative impact on traffic, noise, wildlife, drainage and other areas.
Finally, state preservation officials sent a letter to the town Tuesday stating that the new hotel “will not negatively impact” the potentially historic status of the Lord Amherst motor lodge, built in 1962.
“We think we have addressed every single potential environmental impact that’s been raised,” Hopkins said.
The board gave its approval shortly after midnight.
Chairman Plunkett referred to “volumes of information” provided by many consultants and reviewed by various town departments and state officials in support of the determination that there would be “no significant adverse impacts” to the environment.
email: stan@buffnews.com
After a month’s delay and a marathon session of the Amherst Zoning Board of Appeals that ran for more than five hours, the board approved all nine of Iskalo Development’s variance requests, which ranged from parking to signage associated with the hotel. The variance to raise the building height limit passed narrowly, 3-2, with Chairman Matthew Plunkett and board member David Pollack voting no.
The few dozen residents who hung on until nearly 12:30 a.m. to hear the final votes of the board left quietly, though a few muttered “shame on you” as they exited.
Richard Berger, the lawyer representing the residents, expressed his disappointment in the decisions.
“The human environment has to be considered,” he said, “and it wasn’t considered at all.”
The project, which has stirred renewed debate about the town’s 65-foot height limit for commercial properties, is now expected to go to the Amherst Planning Board on March 21 for final site plan approval.
The $15 million, 137-room Hyatt Place would go up behind the Lord Amherst Hotel, on the northwest side of the Main Street-Youngmann Highway interchange.
Paul Bohdan Iskalo, head of Iskalo Development, said the Zoning Board’s votes validates what his company has been saying about the project and its appropriateness for the location.
“Those opposed to the project have unfortunately put out a lot of inaccurate information,” he said afterward. “This vote has validated our feeling that this project is consistent with the comprehensive master plan.”
Many opponents pleaded with the board Tuesday to take into consideration the needs of the community and to embrace their power to set limits as guardians of the town.
“You have the power to say no,” said former Zoning Board member Debra Norton. “Why in God’s name wouldn’t you do it?”
Many residents said they were “disgusted,” angry and sorry to have to “beg” the board for consideration. Several also said they were saddened that Iskalo Development, which has created attractive and sensitive community projects elsewhere in Amherst, has refused to consider scaling back the Hyatt Place project despite repeated neighborhood pleas.
“Even one floor would be something,” said Livingston Parkway resident James Reynolds. “Obviously, we would love a three-story – I would love a two-story – building. But every story less than that six is significant to us.”
He urged the Zoning Board to deny Iskalo’s variance requests to give neighborhood residents more leverage to negotiate for a smaller project.
Iskalo told the board that the Hyatt Place project will strengthen the Main Street economy and save and restore the Lord Amherst Hotel. The current project is more modest than what could have been built had his company decided to raze the Lord Amherst and build something larger, he said.
“I recognize that nothing I’ve stated here tonight will change the opinion opponents have about the project, or Iskalo Development for that matter,” he said. “All we can do as an organization is put forth the best hospitality campus it can possibly be.”
Though many of the variances were related to minor parking and signage issues, opponents strongly objected to raising the 65-foot building height restriction and replacing natural berms at the edge of the property along Interstate 290 with parking spaces and sound barriers.
The height variance requested would raise the 65-foot building height restriction to 77 feet, 4 inches, to accommodate a signature hotel roofline feature at the front of the building facing the I-290.
“It’s the equivalent of the McDonald’s golden arches, if you will,” said Iskalo Vice President David Chiazza.
If the signature roofline is permitted, Chiazza said, the company would not install a mechanical shed on the top of the building, which would be more objectionable to residents.
Residents criticized the developer for threatening to install a mechanical shed on the roof, and use it as a bargaining chip to get the building height variance.
“I think it will alter the character of the neighborhood,” Plunkett said in explaining his no vote.
Berger, representing the neighborhood residents, said the hotel will sit on a higher slope than nearby Livingston Parkway, where many of the residents live near Mike’s Pond.
Many residents also expressed concern about the salt, oil and other run-off that might enter the pond and harm the wildlife there. Hopkins responded that the developer has already submitted reports regarding storm water quality control efforts on this matter.
The board had delayed action on the variances at its Jan. 15 meeting because an environmental impact review of the project was incomplete.
Lawyer Sean Hopkins, who is representing the developer, spent more than 20 minutes attempting to deconstruct and refute all allegations regarding the project’s potentially negative impact on traffic, noise, wildlife, drainage and other areas.
Finally, state preservation officials sent a letter to the town Tuesday stating that the new hotel “will not negatively impact” the potentially historic status of the Lord Amherst motor lodge, built in 1962.
“We think we have addressed every single potential environmental impact that’s been raised,” Hopkins said.
The board gave its approval shortly after midnight.
Chairman Plunkett referred to “volumes of information” provided by many consultants and reviewed by various town departments and state officials in support of the determination that there would be “no significant adverse impacts” to the environment.
email: stan@buffnews.com