Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wetlands Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission continues review of proposed 74‑room hotel at 165 (H)usatonic Street as reviewers weigh flood‑storage and NEPA questions
Summary
The Lee Conservation Commission continued a Notice of Intent for a proposed four‑story, 74‑room Marriott at 165 (transcript: 'Fusatonic') Street to allow a third‑party wetland reviewer and DEP staff to provide written comments about compensatory flood storage, stormwater and potential ENF/NEPA triggers.
The Lee Conservation Commission on June 17 continued its review of a Notice of Intent for a proposed four‑story, 74‑room, 11,577‑square‑foot Marriott hotel at 165 (transcript spelling: “Fusatonic”) Street after the applicant asked for more time while awaiting written comments from a third‑party reviewer.
Brian Slider, a civil engineer with Foresight representing Garden Management, told the commission the project team is preparing revised plans to show foot‑for‑foot compensatory flood storage, a planting/restoration plan and additional stormwater improvements but needs the reviewer’s comments before finalizing those materials. "We are removing additional compensation from below the flood plain elevation... we'll certainly show that on a plan that's incoming," Slider said.
The project drew written opposition from an abutter represented by attorney Dennis Egan Jr., who argued the Notice of Intent was incomplete and did not document how compensatory storage is provided at each elevation, citing 310 CMR standards and the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act. A member of the public who identified themself as San Patel of 118 Maple Street urged the commission to consider a NEPA advisory opinion or an environmental notification form (ENF), saying state review could be required given anticipated permits from MassDOT and alteration of wetlands or floodplain.
Commissioners and commenters asked that photographs and a short video of prior flooding be entered in the public record and made available to reviewers. Commission members said they want written comments from the third‑party reviewer David Cameron and input from Mark Stinson of the Department of Environmental Protection before resuming deliberations.
The commission moved to continue the hearing to its next regularly scheduled meeting on July 1 so reviewers’ reports and any supplemental materials can be submitted and considered.
If the reviewers or staff identify outstanding regulatory deficiencies, commissioners said they will expect specific plan revisions showing how the project meets the performance standards for work in riverfront and floodplain areas. For now, no permit decision was made; the matter remains continued pending those technical reviews.
