Meeting Minutes Approved as amended, 6/19/2013
Planning Board
Wednesday, March 20, 2013
Newbury Town Hall
Members Present: Kathleen Pearson, Chair; Linda McCamic; John O’Connell; David Powell; John Weis; George Morse (Associate Member)
Staff Present: Martha Taylor, Town Planner
Kathleen Pearson, Chair, called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. and closed it immediately in order to open the public hearing to consider the application of Federal Street Restoration LLC for a Special Permit for multifamily dwellings (four units) in connection with the redevelopment of the Woodbridge School.
- Public Hearing: Woodbridge School, 33 High Road, Special Permit Application:
Kathleen Pearson, Planning Board Chair, opened the public hearing at 7:35 p.m. Linda McCamic, Planning Board Clerk, read the public notice. The Applicants provided the return receipts for the certified mail notification of abutters and the tear sheets from The Daily News for the two publications of the legal notice.
Linda McCamic then recused herself from the hearing, due to her professional relationship with the Applicant, and the Chair designated the Board’s Associate Member, George Morse, to take her place for the purposes of this hearing.
The Applicants, Dolores Person and Richard Person of Federal Street Restoration, were in attendance, along with their architect, Craig Douglas, and their contractor, Paul Leone of River Village Carpenters.
D. Person presented the project on behalf of the Applicants, noting that they were intrigued by the RFP and that they felt the guidelines for renovation were very appropriate to protect the building. The project includes: 1) renovation of the School building into three condominium units, 2)construction of a freestanding single family house as a fourth condominium unit, and 3) construction of a five-car garage. D. Person said that because the School building itself is a monolith, the smaller structures are intended to blend the site into the neighborhood.
D. Person then turned the presentation over to Craig Douglas, who described the architectural aspects of the project. He said that the Applicants are proposing to create four dwelling units on the site, as allowed by Special Permit in the Upper Green Business District. Three of these units will be in the School building and the fourth will be in a detached bungalow-style house intended to be compatible with the residences on Graham Avenue. The design of the detached garage will be in the spirit of a carriage house. There will be a total of 21 off-street parking spaces, including garage space for seven cars.
The facades of the School building facing High Road and Graham Avenue will remain as they are and the main entry will be maintained. An elevator tower will be added on the south side of the building, so that all units will be accessible. All units will be two-bedroom with two and a half baths. The second floor unit in the School building will run the full length of the building. The two first floor units will have the main living area and master bedroom on the first floor, with additional living area and a bedroom in the basement. Mr. Douglas has provided an exterior space for each unit, with two patios at grade and a second floor deck.
Modifications are being proposed for the south and east elevations of the building to accommodate the bedroom layout. On the east side, the only change will be to replace one window with an exterior door. Trim details will be in keeping with the existing exterior trim of the building. The addition for the elevator on the south side will maintain the same roof pitch and the same architectural detailing as the existing building. New windows and a French door will be installed on the south elevation to work with the room layout. Mullion patterns and trim will match the existing windows. The second floor deck may have a trellis and may be painted a darker color than the existing trim to be less prominent.
The garage will have five bays and will be similar to a New England carriage house, with appropriate roof pitch, brackets and detailing.
The detached dwelling unit is designed to be in keeping with the neighborhood and to provide a transition between the school and the adjacent residences. The bungalow style was chosen to be compatible with other houses on the street. C. Douglas felt that it would not be appropriate for the detached structure to match the Colonial Revival style of the School building. The first floor of the house will tentatively be set at elevation 45. A retaining wall is proposed to allow direct walk-out access from the living room. A second floor deck on top of a two-car garage will provide exterior space for the unit.
At the conclusion of Mr. Douglas’s presentation, the Chair opened the hearing up to questions from the Planning Board members.
John O’Connell asked when the engineered site plan would be ready for review. D. Person replied that it would be done after the Special Permit is received. She noted that the amount of permeable surface will be increased with the removal of existing asphalt and the addition of heated gravel driveways. No storage for snow will be needed in the winter. Richard Person added that the materials will be more natural and more attractive than the existing. C. Douglas said that all the existing paving, approximately 8,000 s.f., will be removed and replaced with about 6,000 s.f. of heated gravel driveway.
J. O’Connell expressed concern about the sequencing of approvals, since the drainage won’t be designed until after the Special Permit is issued. D. Person suggested that the Special Permit could be subject to an acceptable drainage plan. R. Person added that they are very concerned about the whole project – they went to extraordinary lengths with the Federal Street project and will here as well.
John Weis noted that what is now being proposed is different from the initial rendering included in the bid proposal and asked what led to the changes. C. Douglas replied that the narrowness of the site prohibits access to the detached dwelling in the way shown on the original design. The new design also takes into account the grades on the site, which he didn’t have when the proposal was put together. J. Weis expressed concern that the house looks like a garage with an addition rather than a single-family house. C. Douglas noted that the house will volumetrically present itself differently than the elevation. Shingle style buildings are less boxy than Colonial style.
J. Weis then questioned the Shingle-style design. C. Douglas replied that he didn’t want to replicate the Colonial Revival design of the School Building. D. Person noted that one will see the front elevation driving up Graham Avenue from High Road, not the end elevation. R. Person added that the materials have been carefully selected. C. Douglas said that the exterior will be clad with shingles dipped in bleaching oil.
J. Weis pointed out that the elevator enclosure on the rear (south) of the building is pretty harsh and blank and wondered if use of some different materials would help break it up. C. Douglas noted that this is the least important elevation and no one will have a clear view of it. However, he said he would look at materials.
J. Weis then asked when the Board could expect a landscape plan. D. Person replied that the landscape plan will follow the issuance of the Special Permit. She noted that boxwood edge beds had been planted at 19 Federal Street and could be very appropriate. J. Weis followed up with questions about screening of the elevations and how the basement windows would be cut out for more light. C. Douglas said that they will cut out window wells and determine what size the windows should be.
J. Weis asked where the retaining wall will be and who will take care of it. D. Person said that the condominium documents will call for the detached unit to take care of its own building and the other three units will take care of the School building.
David Powell said that he was a little distressed at the mixture of shingle-style house, “A & P” garage, and Colonial Revival School building on the site. He noted that what’s on Graham Avenue is a mish-mash of styles and said that he felt that a five-bay center entry Colonial would be better for the detached residence. In his opinion this area is part of a neighborhood which is effectively an extension of Newburyport and there is an opportunity here to create something which is distinctive but still part of the greater neighborhood. He then expressed concern about the height of the garage roof as shown in the elevation and said that it appears so dominant that it looks like someone could be running a business out of the building. C. Douglas said that one
will not see it that way when it is built because of the slope.
D. Powell suggested taking this opportunity to install a sidewalk to tie the site to High Road. D. Person felt that a sidewalk on Graham Avenue would make it look more industrial.
D. Powell expressed concern that the fenestration on the south side for the second floor deck does not respect the existing window patterns of the School. He also said that in his opinion the deck should not have a trellis. R. Person replied that they are trying to find a balance between respecting what is there and making the units marketable. They went through a similar process with the Federal Street development.
Martha Taylor pointed out that the chimneys will be removed on the interior of the building to create more usable space but will be replicated on the exterior. She also suggested that the applicant review the design of the second floor deck, which looks spindly.
K. Pearson recapped the information the board had been given regarding parking and setbacks, which will all meet the Town’s dimensional requirements. She then asked about screening from the adjacent properties. R. Person replied that they want to replace the existing chain-link fence with high quality fencing and provide as much privacy as possible.
K. Pearson then asked whether there would be stones all over the street from the gravel driveway. C. Douglas replied that the driveway surface is more like hard pack. R. Person added that they have never had to replace stones at Federal Street and that the heated driveways don’t need to be plowed in the winter, so the stones are not displaced. Paul Leone said that there will not be much slope there and that the gravel is usually applied over stone dust, so the surface is pretty stable.
D. Powell pointed out that there is only one pedestrian entry into the garage and asked what kind of garage doors will be used. C. Douglas replied that the garage doors will be overhead.
K. Pearson then opened the hearing up to the public for comments and questions.
Bill and Debra Cooper, 35 High Road, said that they were thrilled to have a high quality project going into the Woodbridge School and that their only concern was their view of the back of the building, which they felt could be resolved by landscaping. B. Cooper asked for more information on the retaining wall. C. Douglas said the wall would be about 4’ high. B. Cooper then asked how much of the garage roof would stick up above the grade of their land. C. Douglas replied that it was hard to say right now, since they have no topographic information about the Coopers’ property. Debra Cooper requested that their view be kept in mind. R. Person replied that with the Federal Street project they looked at all angles and all views and will do the same
here.
Shawn Smith, 4 Graham Avenue, said that he was glad to see something being done with the School. However, the detached structure was a little larger than he had envisioned and he was worried that the “bungalow” would be a hulking presence. D. Person replied that the intent was to keep it in scale with the neighborhood and that it would be screened from Mr. Smith’s property. The chain link fence and the trees between the two properties were discussed and Mr. Smith said that he was not attached to the trees, which could be replaced. C. Douglas noted that the house is 4 or 5 feet lower than the existing grade on Mr. Smith’s property and that the design is intended to keep the height down. He added that the building will act as a retaining wall. R.
Person noted that it will be important to make the drainage flow properly in that area.
Scott Boal, 1 Graham Avenue, said that he lives across the street from the Woodbridge School and gave the development a “thumbs up.” His one concern was about the “compound” that is going to be created and the separate freestanding building. He wondered whether it would be possible for the house to go on top of the garage to reduce the footprint, what the impact on the septic system would be, and how parking might be affected. He noted that off street parking is a significant concern, particularly on Saturday mornings which traffic for the bank jams up all of Graham Avenue. He also asked who would be responsible for maintenance of the condominium. D. Person replied that the Condominium Association would be responsible for maintenance. S. Boal then
asked how she knew that it would be maintained. D. Person replied that these will be very high end units and that the buildings and landscaping will be well cared for.
Chris Drelich, 14 High Road, resident and Clerk/Treasurer of Newbury’s Historical Commission, said that the project is lovely and that the Historical Commission is very impressed that the building won’t be taken down. He asked for clarification of what was being approved through the Special Permit process and whether there would be other approval processes that the project would go through. D. Powell replied that the Special Permit application was for approval to build four dwelling units on the site and that there would be conditions on the project approval. D. Person added that Federal Street Restoration’s process will be very transparent. C. Drelich responded that he would like to know what will protect the Town and ensure that the project is built as
presented.
K. Pearson asked whether the Woodbridge School sign would be going or staying. D. Person replied that it will be restored and remounted on the building.
D. Cooper asked if the picket fence on the street sides of the site would come back. D. Person said that could be considered.
K. Pearson then summarized the discussion and asked for a straw poll on whether the scale of the project and the number of structures on the site were acceptable. All members replied in the affirmative, with D. Powell adding that he was still concerned about the lack of a sidewalk on Graham Avenue and how the High Street sidewalk would turn the corner at the intersection.
Next steps in the process were discussed. It was agreed that a site plan showing the stormwater impact will be submitted. J. Weis suggested further that progress drawings be submitted to the Planner for review by the Board as the project is developed.
K. Pearson asked if there were any further comments from the Board members or the public. There being none, she asked for a motion to close the public hearing.
Motion: A motion was made by D. Powell and seconded by J. Weis to close the public hearing to consider the Special Permit application submitted by Federal Street Restoration LLC for approval to redevelop the Woodbridge School site into four residential condominium units. The motion passed unanimously.
The regular Planning Board meeting was re-opened at 9:05 p.m.
- Woodbridge School Special Permit Application:
The Board discussed the Special Permit application, the evidence presented, and the comments from the public.
Motion: A motion was made by J. Weis and seconded by J. O’Connell to grant the Special Permit for redevelopment of the Woodbridge School site into four residential condominium units, with the condition that the developers meet with adjacent property owners and prepare plans for stormwater management, landscaping, screening, etc., to be submitted to the Town Planner for review by the Board. The motion passed unanimously.
Following the vote, George Morse was excused and Linda McCamic re-joined the Board for the remainder of the meeting.
Motion: A motion was made by D. Powell and seconded by J. O’Connell to approve the meeting minutes of February 20, 2013 as amended. The motion passed with four in favor (Pearson, Weis, O’Connell, and Powell) and one abstention (McCamic, who was not present at that meeting).
Motion: A motion was made by D. Powell and seconded by J. O’Connell to approve the meeting minutes of March 6, 2013 as written. The motion passed unanimously.
- Proposed Zoning Amendments for the Annual Town Meeting:
The Board discussed the presentation for the upcoming public hearing on the proposed zoning amendments. It also discussed changes to the setback requirements in the proposed Ground-Mounted Solar Installation by-law and refinement of the language regarding financial surety.
On a motion made by J. Weis and seconded by J. O’Connell, the meeting was adjourned at 10:08 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Martha Taylor
Town Planner
| 
