Wilber School Redevelopment Committee

August 1, 2005 Meeting Minutes

Amended and Approved on August 8^th, 2005

Committee Attendees

Jim Goldsmith (Chair)	Marilyn Z. Kahn
David DePree (Co-Chair)	Marcia Liebman
Michael Baskin	Melissa Mills
Craig Edwards	Joel Tran
David Gordon

Guest Attendees

Larry Bluestone (presenter)	Larry Koff (presenter)
David Grasfield	Paul Lauenstein
Jeanette Keating

Meeting Initiation

Meeting was called to order at 7:35 pm by David DePree.

Meeting Discussion

v Koff provided meeting agenda/worksheet (updated version is attached) and asked Tran to provide overview of last weeks meeting with the other concerned committees.

v Tran reported that at the BOH Meeting:

• In attendance at the meeting were members of the Planning Board, Selectmen, Board of Health, Zoning Board, Water Advisory Board and Conservation Commissioner.
• Issues regarding nitrates and their effect on Well #4 were raised; CHAPA study did not answer all questions raised.
• Tran spoke to Walter Newman of the ZBA about impervious surfaces.  The ZBA might look favorably if the mitigation was done properly.
• There are no historical records to indicate how much water was used by the Wilber School. More study is needed to determine what will affect Well #4. This was an issue brought up by BOH Chairperson Ann Bingham.

v Koff reviewed his previous presentation (attached) -  Additional discussion points as follows:

• Zoning –This is a special permit procedure. As per Koff, zoning is a hurdle for the project.
• Issues and Opportunities – Necessary variances, modification of zoning bylaws, and special permits were discussed. Additionally there is a concern regarding traffic flow.
• Groundwater Resources Protection District – Major issue. Next step is for the Board of Health and Conservation Committee to review.  Tran stated that the BOH and CC will work with us but want a study of how the groundwater will flow to Well #4 before addressing what can be placed on the site. Discussed space for nine, one bedroom apartments or three, three bedroom homes. Maximum of 110 gpd   per bedroom. Additionally the DEP may need to be involved.
• “As of Right” Alternatives – Historic District Commission permission and town demolition permit will be needed if 2 – 3 homes are built.

v Committee members all agree:

• Library should be placed on the site.
• There should be housing utilization if able to overcome water/septic issues because it is a good source of income and there is a need for affordable housing.
• Retain the Wilber if viable or retain the new part of the Wilber which is more attractive; keep façade if possible.  Can create a common, or enclosure for green space.
• Retain green space in front of building for visibility.
• From traffic and gateway perspective, office and retail space is needed if feasible.
• Age restricted housing.

v Committee members expressed reservations about:

• Town Hall on new site as it would have a negative financial impact on the Wilber site (no revenue generated).
• Dense residential use.
• Town park which would mean demolishing the building.
• Severe impact on the neighborhood.

v Other:

• Bluestone said the Wilber is located within an historic district and is unsure of how retail space will work. Bluestone stated that within the current building there is no entry at ground level. You need to come in and step down or step up. DePree suggested commercial or medical space.

v Issues not resolved:

· Water

o Need to define how to clear any ambiguities regarding groundwater.

o How do we get around volume regulations/limitations so there is no environmental effect?

o How do we make sure we mitigate environmental impact to Well #4?

o Recalculate flows.

o Grasfield was asked to have West

o on and Samson perform a review to determine impacts of groundwater.

· Sell versus lease:

o 40 year lease versus 99 year lease

o Sell versus 99 year lease (greater chance of viable plan with one of these alternatives).

Next Steps

1. Invite Leldon Langley to meeting to discuss water quality.
2. Invite Diane Langley to meeting to discuss green space.  
3. Koff/Bluestone prepare 2-3 sketches to be used as a tool to discuss with other committees.
4. Obtain summary of findings of CHAPA grant.
5. Discuss abatement of building at the next meeting. If abated, the building will become more attractive to developers. Decision on abatement needs to be made by 9/1 if it is to be voted on at the November Town Meeting.

Meeting Schedule

The next meeting will be held on August 8, 2005 at 7:30 pm in the Cynthia B. Fox Community Room at the Sharon Public Library.

Meeting Adjournment

Mills/Kahn moved to adjourn meeting at 10:30pm: motion carried unanimously.

Respectfully submitted,

Rachelle F. Levitts

Larry Koff & Associates

Presentation

8/1/05

Wilber School Redevelopment Committee

1.  Consultant Presentation:

¨ Review 7/21 Edits to Findings Report 

¨ Discussion of As of Right Alternatives

2.  Committee up-date  on results of  7/25 meeting with BOH/CC

3.  Discussion of Alternatives

4.  Next Steps

1.  Highlights of 7/21 edits:

n Zoning:  Section 622:  Site Plan approval is needed by Planning Board in Business C District (Section 633)

n Goals:

¨  Public Purpose Uses i.e. uses which address broad public need should be encouraged

¨ Public Purposes uses should, to extent possible, leverage additional public or private funding

n Issues and Opportunities (Page 4)

¨ Uses NOT permitted:  Multifamily development (apartments not above stores)

¨ Minimum landscaped open space-approval of reduction from 30% to 15% likely

¨  Off Street Parking:  Multifamily development assume 2 parking spaces for units containing 2 or more bedrooms

¨ Groundwater Resources Protection District

o CANNOT locate septic field on site which does not contain naturally occurring material

o Other constraints as shown: lot area,  requirement of 60,000 sf/ d.u., prohibition of package treatment plant, limitation on sewage generation exceeding 6 gpd/1,000 sf of lot area , Impervious materials coverage.

o Nitrogen Sensitive Area, SP  over 2,000 gpd

2.  “As of Right” Alternatives

n 2-3  homes (3 bedroom)  i.e. Groundwater Resources Protection district limitation of 60,000 sf./unit {Historic District Commission permission &Town demolition permit will be needed}

n Library in existing school, septic under 2,000 gpd,, parking of 75 cars i.e. 26,250 sf. + 20,000 = 46,000/ 160,000 sf.=28% impervious coverage

n Office Use (Special Permit):  26,000 s.f. (two floors, 13,000 sf each)

                   Parking requirement/land coverage constraint

                  13,000 sf x 5 spaces/1000 sf = 65 spaces

                  13,000 sf x 3 spaces/1000 sf=  39 spaces

                                                                  104 spaces x 350 sf. each i.e. 36,400 sf +                                13,000 sf = 50,000 sf/160,000 sf= 31% site coverage

n Retail/office (Special Permit):  One level of each  at 15,000 sf = parking of 120 cars, site coverage of 35%

3. Alternatives Evaluation

ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION                                                                                               

GOALS	RE-USE ALTERNATIVES*
	1 H-L	2 L/TH-H	3 R/O-L	4 R/H-L	5 H-L	6 Park
Economic Development
n Gateway for revitalization of P.O. Sq.	+	+	0	+	+	0
n Revenue Stream	+	0
n Tax revenue to Town	+	0
Public Purpose Uses
n Public Need	+	+
n Utilize portion of Site for remediation of  nitrogen loading	+	+
n Retain Wilber School and Green Space	0	0
n Other Public Purposes i.e. meeting rooms, studio space, theater, etc.	0	0
n Leverage additional Public funding	+	0
Mix of Uses
n Housing	+	+
n Retail	-	-
n Office	-	-
n Restaurant	-	-
n Library	+	+
n Town Hall	-	+
n Whole Foods Grocery	-	-
n Other Residential	-	-
Environmental/Neighborhood Protection
n Remediate current 21e problems in building	+	+	+	+	+	+
n Protect town’s water supply
n Remediate off site nitrogen loading
n Other neighborhood impacts: traffic, noise, etc.	0	0	0	0	0	0

*Note: H= Housing, L= Library, O=Office, R=Retail, TH=Town Hall

**Note:  +=achieves goal, 0 = neutral, - = negative