Williams College Science Quad Proposal

8/20/2019 Williams College Science Quad Proposal

1/509

WILLIAMS COLLEGEScience Center Renewal Project

Zoning Submission

12.18.2015


2/509

1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ZBA - Application

Narrative in Support of the Application and Development Plan Review

Exhibit A – Scoping Letter

Exhibit B – Site Permitting Plans

Exhibit C – Stormwater Management Report

Exhibit D – Logistics Plan

Exhibit E – Site Renderings

Exhibit F – Lot Coverage Calculations


3/509


4/509


5/509

2

The President and Trustees of Williams College

Narrative in Support of:

Administrative Appeal to the Zoning Board of Appeals,

Application for Special Permits,

And Development Plan Review related to its

Science Center Renewal Project

The President and Trustees of Williams College (“Williams College” or the

“College”) applies to the Zoning Board of Appeals (“ZBA”) for relief and development

plan review related to its Science Center project.

I. Project Overview.

Williams College proposes to renovate and expand its science center facilities to

create needed labs, workshops, and classrooms, to modernize out-dated facilities, and to

bring them into compliance with modern academic standards. With more than half ofWilliams’ students majoring in a science, and significant numbers of those conducting

research alongside faculty, the college lacks sufficient academic space for the sciences.

Moreover, a significant portion of the existing space is substandard. A facilities condition

assessment not only revealed that the college lacks the space it needs to support scientific

research by faculty and students, it also showed that Bronfman Science Center leaks

significant amounts of heat and is structurally incapable of renovation. This project will

not only solve the need for more academic space, it will also improve the college’s

energy profile: even though the floor area of the science center will increase, energy

consumption will decrease.

This two-phased project will build a center designed for generations of futureWilliams’ students and faculty. In the first phase, a new 77,500 GSF addition (the South

Addition) comprised primarily of workshops, research labs, teaching labs, and offices for

the departments of physics, chemistry, and biology will be constructed south of the

existing Morley Scientific Laboratory building. This will integrate the new spaces

directly with the existing science facilities. To create space for these facilities on the

parcel, Williams moved Miller House, removed Siskind house, will relocate one barn,

and will tear down another.

In the second phase, Bronfman Science Center will be removed and replaced with

similarly sized addition (the North Addition) that will house 99,500 GSF of more flexiblespace, including classrooms, labs, offices, and collaborative spaces for mathematics,

statistics, psychology, and geosciences. On the inside, this modern, more adaptable

space should sustain science education at Williams for the foreseeable future. A multi-

story entry space accessed from both the quad and street levels links the departmental

offices on the upper floors with the classrooms and 200-person auditorium on the lower

levels. From the outside, the North Addition redefines the west end of the Science Quad

and creates a more welcoming threshold to the campus. The historic and attractive Clark

Hall will remain available for another academic use in the future.


6/509

3

The first phase of construction will in the spring of 2016, and the second phase

should finish in 2020.

II. Permitting Overview.

On July 28, 2015, the Community Development Department conducted a scoping

session for this project. The scoping letter is included as Exhibit A with this application.

Williams College submits this narrative in support of its application to the Zoning Board

of Appeals for the following:

1. An administrative appeal from the decision of the Town Planner / Director

of Community Development as set forth in the enclosed Scoping Letter. The

college seeks relief from building height restrictions under the Williamstown

Zoning Bylaw § 70-4.1 and from building coverage limits under Bylaw § 70-4.3.

2. A special permit under Section 70-1.4.(c) of the Williamstown ZoningBylaw (the “Bylaw”) to allow the extension of an existing nonconforming

structure. In one location a portion of the pre-existing Biology building is twelve

feet from the neighboring property, rather than the required fifteen feet.

3. A special permit under Section 5.1.B. for relief from the development

standard for existing grades to allow more than six feet of cut in the area of the

proposed loading dock. And

4. Development Plan Review under § 70-8.2.

The college will also seek a parking determination from the Planning Board. Asdocumented by the scoping letter, this project does not require prior approval from the

Conservation Commission.

III. Appeal From Administrative Decision.

As the scoping letter shows, the Director of the Community Development

Department / Town Planner determined that the proposed North and South Additions

cannot be built in compliance with the zoning bylaw. They require relief from its

building height and coverage limits. As the Scoping Letter explains, the ZBA can grant

this relief administratively under the “Tufts – Campbell” analysis that the Massachusetts

Supreme Judicial Court developed in the cases of Trustees of Tufts College v. Medford ,415 Mass 753, 616 N.E.2d 433 (1993) and Campbell v. City Council of Lynn, 415 Mass.

772, 778; 616 N.E.2d 445, 449 (1993). For the reasons fully described below, Williams

College respectfully requests that the Williamstown Zoning Board of Appeals grant this

relief.

A. Massachusetts Law Prevents Zoning Bylaws from Imposing

Unreasonable Regulations on Educational Uses.


7/509

4

In Massachusetts, educational uses cannot be required to obtain special use

permits, and site development standards cannot be enforced against an educational use if

they would be unreasonable as applied to the project. No zoning ordinance or bylaw

“shall prohibit, regulate or restrict the use of land or structures for . . . educational

purposes on land owned . . . by a nonprofit educational corporation.” M.G.L. c. 40A, § 3.The land or structures put to educational uses, however, “may be subject to reasonable

regulation concerning the bulk and height of structures and determining yard sizes, lot

area, setbacks, open space, parking, and building coverage requirements.” M.G.L. c.

40A, § 3.

Well-settled criteria determine when the application of a facially neutral zoning

regulation is unreasonable under Massachusetts law. In Trustees of Tufts College v.

Medford , 415 Mass 753, 616 N.E.2d 433 (1993), the Supreme Judicial Court considered

whether Medford’s dimensional and parking requirements could be applied to a library

addition and parking structure proposed by Tufts. That Court recognized that “where the

requirements to be applied do not take into account the special characteristics of theeducational use (such as . . . the need for large classroom and library buildings) . . .

application of the requirements to the property of an educational institution may be

inappropriately restrictive.” 415 Mass. at 758 n.6; 616 N.E.2d at 438 n.6. It then

explained “that the question of reasonableness of a local zoning requirement as applied to

a proposed educational use will depend on the particular facts of each case,” and that the

educational institution bears the burden of showing “that the local requirements are

unreasonable as applied to its proposed project.” 415 Mass. at 759; 616 N.E.2d at 438-

39.

Williams College has several ways to discharge its burden. It can prove

unreasonableness by “demonstrating that compliance would substantially diminish ordetract from the usefulness of the proposed structure, or impair the character of the

institution’s campus, without appreciably advancing the municipality’s legitimate

concerns.” Id. Or, the College might demonstrate an “excessive cost of compliance”

with the regulation that is “without significant gain in terms of municipal concerns.” 415

Mass. at 759-60; 616 N.E.2d at 439. Or, Williams might show that the “facially

reasonable zoning requirements” would “nullify” or “significantly impede an educational

use . . . without appreciably advancing municipal goals.” Campbell v. City Council of

Lynn, 415 Mass. 772, 778; 616 N.E.2d 445, 449 (1993); accord Martin v. Corporation of

the Presiding Bishop of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints , 434 Mass 141,

150; 747 N.E.2d 131 (2001); Rogers v. Town of Norfolk , 432 Mass. 374, 385; 734 N.E.2d

1143, 1150 (2000).

As the Cambpell Court explained, “the central question is whether the application

of the [zoning] requirements to a specific project in particular setting furthers legitimate

municipal concerns to a sufficient extent to warrant requiring an educational institution . .

. to alter its development plans.” 415 Mass. at 764.

B. Two Requirements in the Bylaw would be Unreasonable if Applied to


8/509

5

This Project.

As the Scoping Letter explained, “the proposed facilities are an integral piece of

the education[al] mission of the institution” and a “by right use under local zoning and

Ch. 40A MGL.” The College, however, respectfully requests relief from the building

height and coverage standards in the Bylaw, because they would be unreasonable asapplied to this project.

1. It would be unreasonable to apply the Bylaw’s building height

limit to the proposed building additions.

The Bylaw restricts building heights in the General Residence district to a

maximum elevation of 35 feet as of right, or up to 45 feet by special permit. Bylaw,

§ 70-4.1.A, 4.1.B(4). In the abstract, this restriction serves legitimate municipal concerns

by promoting safety and preserving the access of adjoining premises to light and air.

Applied to the proposed new additions to the science center building, however, this

standard is unreasonable.

With the site’s sloping topography, the South Addition measure approximately

76’10” above grade, and the North Addition measures approximately 58’8” above grade.

These buildings are taller than the bylaw would otherwise allow because they must be

large enough to house the needed academic program spaces, they cannot be built

underground economically, and they should be built to the same architectural scale as the

surrounding buildings. Nor can these uses be located off site. Locating all the science

programs together in the same quadrangle is essential because scientific inquiry and

education is increasingly interdisciplinary. More and more areas of study and research--

including neuroscience, biochemistry and molecular biology, astrophysics, biophysics,

and biostatistics--span the boundaries of traditional academic departments.

The proposed design locates all the required academic spaces within a building

that is scaled to reflect its surroundings. If it were forced to comply with the height

requirements, it would sprawl and cover too much ground. Reducing the height of this

building would not only “substantially diminish or detract” from its usefulness, it would

also exacerbate impervious coverage within the parcel. This project charts a middle

course, creating the needed spaces within additions that match the scale of the existing

science center and preserve a historic quadrangle that opens to the town green.

Moreover, the proposed project will will mitigate or improve several existing

municipal concerns. The existing stormwater management system will be significantlyimproved including two (2) new underground detention system, new water quality

treatment structures, and includes rainwater reuse. The rainwater harvesting system will

collect rainwater from existing and proposed roof tops in an underground cistern and then

pump it to cooling towers, where it will be used for evaporative cooling of the building.

The proposed stormwater management system will help mitigate the rate and volume of

runoff and improve the water quality of runoff discharging to the municipal drainage

system. Additionally, reducing the footprints of the buildings allows the creation of


9/509

6

additional parking in the Spring Street neighborhood, which was one of the most

commonly raised concerns throughout the course of the town’s recent economic

development review and planning process.

In short, making the building any shorter or smaller would significantly

compromise the college’s ability to carry out its educational mission, either by imposingexcessive costs or by prohibiting core educational facilities. As applied to this building

in this specific location, the height limit would “substantially diminish or detract from the

usefulness of the proposed structure. . . . without appreciably advancing municipal

goals.” Tufts, 415 Mass. at 759. For these reasons, it would be unreasonable to enforce

the Bylaw’s height limits against this building.

2. It would be unreasonable to apply the Bylaw’s building coverage

limits to the proposed building additions.

In 1997, when it permitted an earlier expansion of the science center, the ZBA’s

decision allowed 30.8% of the building lot (commonly owned contiguous property) to becovered by buildings, more than the bylaw’s nominal limit of 20%. The new North

Addition’s footprint is slightly smaller than Bronfman’s and Miller House and Siskind

House have been removed, but the overall building coverage within this lot remains

above 20%, at 26.04%. As the lot coverage calculations in Exhibit F detail, the proposed

project will result in 130,088 square feet of coverage on a 499,633 square foot lot. While

more than the bylaw allows, this actually is less coverage than the ZBA permitted in

1996, when it approved of 154,451 square feet of building coverage. As is described

above, this project is sized to provide essential academic uses, and has been designed to

balance to trade off between building height and building footprint. At the same time, the

proposed plans preserve the open, airy feel of the Science quadrangle, enhance pedestrian

connections, provide additional parking, and reduce offsite stormwater impacts from theScience Center. Accordingly, continued relief from the building coverage requirements

is warranted because they would “substantially diminish or detract from the usefulness of

the proposed structure. . . . without appreciably advancing municipal goals.” Tufts, 415

Mass. at 759.

IV. Williams College Respectfully Requests a Special Permit under Section

1.4.C. to Permit Alteration and Additions to a Preexisting Non-conforming

Structure.

At one corner, an original portion of the Science Center building is located 12 feetfrom the rear boundary line of a neighboring property.

The plans include the following measures to mitigate the negative impacts of the

proposed project on the neighborhood:

The North Building has a pitched roof to mitigate the height and blend

with the character and context of the neighboring structures on Hoxsey


10/509

7

Street as well as the adjacent campus buildings.

The façade of the North Building is broken down in scale by wings of the

building that face Hoxsey Street, reducing the apparent volume as it

addresses the neighborhood.

The loading dock south of the existing Bronfman building will be

removed and replaced with a more pedestrian friendly and landscapedcirculation path.

Stormwater runoff at both North and South building locations will be

reduced from current conditions by capturing and reusing captured rain

water on-site for mechanical use and toilet flushing.

New plantings along Hoxsey Street will soften the street edge; replenish

the pedestrian experience and transition to the building.

Loading dock services for the South Building will be consolidated by the

existing Morley loading dock and screened by the building and plantings.

A new parking area comprised of 22 spaces will be located off Walden

Street and screened with plantings.

With these measures of mitigation, the alterations and additions will not be

substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood, and relief is warranted.

V. This Project Requires a Special Permit under Section 5.1.B. for relief from

the development standard for existing grades.

As the Scoping Letter explains, this project may be subject to special permits

granting relief from the some of the site development standards of § 5. Under Section

70-5.4.A.4 of the Bylaw, “[e]xisting grade should be changed minimally, typically

departing from existing grade by no more than six feet, and resulting in a balance on site between cut and fill, except for basement and cellar elevations.” To adjust the location of

the loading dock on the site and to replace a currently failing retaining wall, requires a

small area of cut that exceeds six feet. This small area of cut poses no risks, and no

better design is reasonably feasible.

VI. DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW

Except for those issues where the College has asked the ZBA to grant relief, this

project complies with the applicable portions of Article V, Development Standards and

Section 70-6.1, Off-Street Parking. The following demonstrates compliance with the

applicable development standards identified by the Scoping Letter.

Section 70-5.2 Service Adequacy Requirements

Section 70-5.2.A. (1) Access

The project maintains and improves existing access to the science center from

Hoxsey and Walden Streets, which provide adequate access as defined by the


11/509

8

Subdivision Rules and Regulations.

During the construction period, deliveries and other construction traffic will be

handled in accordance with the Phase 1 logistics plan submitted herewith as Exhibit D.

The purpose of the logistics plan is to minimize the construction phase traffic, parking

and delivery impacts on the surrounding neighborhood, including Spring Street, WaldenStreet, Hoxsey Street, and the municipal parking lot.

The key details of the logistics plan are as follows:

Contractors will be required to park in offsite locations as shown on the plan.

Construction generally will run from 7AM to 3:30 PM, Monday to Friday during

Phase 1 construction of the South Addition.

Construction generally will run from 8AM to 4:30 PM, Monday to Friday during

the Phase 2 construction of the North Addition.

Chandler House will be used for construction offices.

Deliveries to the site will be routed primarily down Stetson Court to a new accessdrive adjacent to the Health Center that will connect Stetson Drive to the Walden

Street, which, with approval from the Board of Selectmen, will return to two-way

traffic.

While occasional construction traffic may travel via Walden and Latham Street,

traffic will diverted from Spring Street (north of Walden), the Knolls, and Hoxsey

Street.

The Town Manager has convened a working group to pursue a permanent

extension of Walden Street to South Street. The college is an active participant in

these conversations and will support the Town’s efforts with this project. If this

road is constructed before the completion of this project, construction traffic may

be re-routed from Stetson Court to South Street.

(As Phase 2 approaches, the college will submit a Phase 2 logistics plan from review and

approval.)

Section 70-5.2.A. (2) Access

Not applicable per scoping letter.

Sections 70-5.2.B. Water supply & C. Sewage disposal.

The project will continue to use public water and sewer, with no anticipated

adverse impacts.

Section 70-5.3 Environmental Protection Requirements

Section 70-5.3.A Water Quality


12/509

9

The science center will continue to be served by Williamstown’s public water

supply, which is adequate.

(1) On-site sewage disposal systems.

Not applicable.

(2) Drainage facilities.

The proposed improvements include the installation of stormwater treatment

devices for the removal of suspended solids and protection of water quality.

Treatment devices will include: catch basins with deep sediment sumps and oil

and gas traps to maintain the quality of surface and ground waters.

Section 70-5.3.B Stormwater Management

As demonstrated by the stormwater management report included as Exhibit C this

project complies with all applicable stormwater management standards and Best

Management Practices.

The project includes a stormwater management system that has been designed in

compliance with the MassDEP Stormwater Management Standards. Best

Management Practices (BMPs) will be used to mitigate potential changes in peak

runoff rate, runoff volume, and provide water quality treatment.

Two stormwater detention systems, one for the South Addition and one for the

North Addition, will mitigate the increase in impervious area and maintain peakrunoff rates below pre-development levels. Both systems have been designed to

provide groundwater recharge by providing dead storage below the outlet pipe

that meets the required recharge volume.

The South Addition includes two rainwater harvesting tanks totaling 20,000

gallons of storage. These tanks collect roof runoff from the South Addition and

the Unified Science Center and reuse this water for mechanical equipment

makeup water in the Unified Science Center. The North Addition includes one

10,000 gallon rainwater harvesting tank. This tank collects roof runoff from the

North Addition and reuses this water inside the building for flush fixtures. These

rainwater harvesting tanks and reuse systems help to mitigate the increase inimpervious area and maintain runoff volumes below pre-development levels.

Through the implementation of the two underground detention systems and three

rainwater harvesting tanks, the proposed stormwater management system will

reduce the post-development peak runoff rates and runoff volumes to below pre-

development levels for Design Points 1 (Hoxsey Street municipal drainage

system) and 2 (Walden Street municipal drainage system). Tables 1 and 2


13/509

10

summarize the pre- and post-development peak runoff rates and runoff volumes

for both design points.

Table 1 – Peak Runoff Rates (in cfs) at Design Points

Storm Event2-year 10-year 25-year 100-year

DP1 – Hoxsey Street

Existing 2.68 4.74 5.96 7.64

Proposed 2.55 4.56 5.75 7.29

Change -0.13 -0.18 -0.21 -0.35

DP2 – Walden Street

Existing 6.26 10.91 13.61 17.34

Proposed 5.95 10.42 13.13 16.66

Change -0.31 -0.49 -0.48 -0.68

Table 2 – Runoff Volumes (in acre-feet) at Design Points

Storm Event

2-year 10-year 25-year 100-year

DP1 – Hoxsey Street

Existing 0.201 0.354 0.445 0.574

Proposed 0.185 0.343 0.437 0.568

Change -0.016 -0.011 -0.008 -0.006

DP2 – Walden Street

Existing 0.462 0.807 1.012 1.298

Proposed 0.421 0.769 0.975 1.263Change -0.041 -0.038 -0.037 -0.035

During construction the contractor will provide adequate stormwater controls and

erosion control to prevent erosion on site and sediment from leaving the site. The

minimum erosion control systems are indicated on the Erosion Control plan

including a sedimentation basin near Walden Street that will also mitigate and

slow the rate of runoff leaving the site during construction prior to the proposed

stormwater management system being completed and functioning. The

stormwater controls shall be adjusted as construction progresses and additional

stormwater controls shall be added as needed.

In addition, the college and the town’s departments of community development

and public works are working together in a broader review of stormwater

management throughout the watershed bounded by South Street, Main Street,

Spring Street, and Christmas Book. This review will help ensure that the

college’s projects within the watershed will handle stormwater in a compatible

manner and will help improve stormwater and lessen flooding conditions.


14/509

11

Section 70-5.3.C Erosion Control

Since the project will disturb more than one acre of land, the contractor will file a

notice of intent with the U.S. EPA and the project will be subject to coverage

under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System and the its

Construction General Permit. Accordingly the contractors and engineers willneed to prepare and submit a stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPP) and

implement its protective measures, including erosion control barriers (i.e. silt

fence, straw wattles, straw bales, and crushed stone), inlet protection at catch

basins, stabilized construction entrance, sedimentation basin(s), surface and slope

stabilization (erosion control blanket, mulch, seeding, etc.)

(1) Stabilizing.

All earth exposed from the project construction will be stabilized where not

covered by vegetation or paved areas. Proposed vegetated areas will be topsoiled,

seeded and mulched.

(2) Erosion control plan.

An erosion control plan is incorporated into the separately bound permitting plan

set. During construction, erosion control barriers will be installed at the limit of

work as defined on the plan.

(3) Requirements.

Wherever possible, existing trees and vegetation will remain. Any topsoil

stripped for reuse shall be stockpiled with siltation fencing at the toe of the piles.

Temporary vegetation (erosion control seed mixes), erosion control blankets,wood chips, crushed stone , diversion swales or sediment basins shall be used

where soils will be exposed for more than 14 days and further construction

activity is not planned in the near future unless the area is used for a staging area.

All areas disturbed due to project construction will be seeded and loamed as

noted on the design plans once construction activities are complete.

(4) Impervious Coverage.

Impervious coverage calculations have been made for each phase of the project.

For the south building extension, the “limit of work”area as shown on the plans isapproximately 3.30 acres (or 143,530 square feet). The proposed impervious area

within this limit of work is approximately 1.90 acres, for an impervious coverage

of 62% of the total limit of work. The average site slope (of landscape areas,

excluding retaining walls) is less than 8 percent grade, giving a maximum

allowable impervious coverage of 80 percent.


15/509

12

For the north building extension, the “limit of work” is 1.5 acres (or 143,530

square feet)The impervious area within the limit of work is approximately 0.8

acres, for an impervious coverage of 62% of the total limit of work. The average

site slope (of landscaped areas, excluding retaining walls) is less than 7 percent,

giving a maximum allowable impervious coverage of 80 percent.

Table 3 – Summary of Existing and Proposed Site Areas

Land UseExisting

(Acres)

Proposed

(Acres)

Change

(Acres)

North Building Site

Buildings 0.43 0.40 -0.03

Pavement

(Roads, parking, walkways, plazas)0.37 0.50 +0.13

Landscape Areas 0.70 0.60 -0.10

Total 1.50 1.50 -

South Building Site

Buildings 0.75 0.96 +0.21

Pavement

(Roads, parking, walkways, plazas)1.15 1.10 -0.05

Landscape Areas 1.40 1.24 -0.16

Total 3.30 3.30 -

(5) Erosion Control Report.

We have submitted the enclosed control plan, which adequately protects against

the potential for erosion related to this project.

Section 70-5.3.D Air Quality

This project is not a major new stationary source of air pollution as defined by the

EPA, nor is the project required to apply to DEP under the Clean Air Act. The project does not represent any new uses or processes that are not currently present

at the site.

Section 70-5.3.E Odors

This project will not cause any emission of odors detectable beyond the boundary

of the site. There are no new uses or processes that would result in odors.


16/509

13

Section 70-5.3.F Plants and Animals

The project will have no significant impact on wildlife habitats or corridors, or to

any plant species listed as endangered, threatened, or of special concern.

Damage to existing trees has been avoided to the greatest extent possible, but theremoval of trees along Hoxsey Street, including one greater than 24 inches in

diameter, is necessary and unavoidable to allow the installation of new utilities.

Williams College will use its best efforts to compensate for the tree removal

though attractive, inviting landscaping along Hoxsey Street that will replace the

lost trees with healthier, more site-appropriate specimens.

Section 70-5.3.G Hazardous Materials

There is no hazardous material manufacturing as part of the project. There will

also be no storing of flammables in quantities exceeding four times that required

for licensing under 527 CMR 14. No use that requires licensing under 310 CMR30.800 is part of this project.

Section 70-5.4 Other Design Requirements

Section 70-5.4.A Site Design

(1) Visibility reduced.

Under the proposed designs the parking spaces are located more than 15 feet from

Hoxsey and Walden Streets, none are located within a required side yard, and less

than one-third are located within the required 30-foot front yard.

(2) Vegetation.

As the site plans show, at least 50% of all required front yards will remain

vegetated.

(3) Building orientations.

The extensions of the building will be perpendicular or parallel to the nearest

town streets.

(4) Existing grade.

The loading dock and a retaining wall require a small area with more than six feet

of cut. Williams College requests special permit relief from this developmentstandard, which requires that the existing grade be changed minimally, and

proposed final grades will not vary from existing grade by six feet.

(5) Site circulation.

The primary access to the site will be pedestrian, through the existing campus

sidewalks. In addition the existing Morley Drive from Walden Street will remain

in place to provide access for pick ups and drop offs and to nearby parking


17/509

14

spaces. Two spaces will be removed near Miller House, but the project will

create a new 22-space parking area along the improved the loading dock access

drive from Walden Street. A failing retaining wall in this location will be

replaced.

The existing access drive and small parking area on Hoxsey Street has beenretained and improved. The loading dock in that location will be removed and the

number of parking spaces will be reduced from 6 to 5.

Overall the project will create 19 new spaces.

The site circulation plans will be reviewed with the Fire Chief to assure safe and

adequate access for emergency vehicles.

(6) Pedestrian access.

The proposed building extensions will be well-served by the existing campus

sidewalk system and the new side walk connections to Walden and HoxseyStreets.

(7) Visibility minimized.

Not applicable this project is not located within the Rural Residence zoning

district.

Section 70-5.4.B Landscaping requirements

(1) Applicability.

The college’s proposed project creates a new 22-space parking lot near Walden

Street to help provide additional parking capacity in the area and will more thanmake up for the informal parking that has occurred as a matter of practice along

the current access drive to the loading dock.

(2) Plants.

Except where relief is explicitly requested and granted, the college will plant the

required number of trees and shrubs within the required planting areas.

(3) Planting areas.

(a) Street planting area; (b) Side-line planting area. Because this

property abuts Route 7 (Main Street), a state-numbered highway, therequirements for street planting areas and side-line planting areas apply.

However, given the landscaping of the town green and the way it relates to the

landscaping of the college campus, technical compliance with these requirements

will not yield attractive results. Accordingly, as an alternative measure of

compliance, the college proposes that implement the landscaping plans as

submitted, and provide sufficient funds for the town to plant or replace 4 trees of

its choosing at locations it selects within the town green.


18/509

15

(c) Parking area interior plantings. Not applicable.

(d) District boundary planting area. Not applicable.

(e) Trail buffers. Not applicable.

(f) Screening. The proposed landscape plans provide the require

screening.

(4) Existing vegetation.

The existing vegetation will be preserved wherever feasible

(5) Exceptions.

Not applicable.

(6) Maintenance.All plant materials will be maintained in a healthful condition. Dead plantings

will be replaced during the next planting season.

Section 70-5.4.C Agricultural Protection

Not applicable.

Section 70-5.4.D Lighting

As shown in the attached lighting plan, the college will comply with the required

lighting limits.

Section 70-5.4.E Noise

The College will comply with the noise regulations set forth in Bylaw Section 70-

5.4.E.

Section 70-5.4.F Vibration

Except for construction activities associated with construction, there will not be

any sources of vibration associated with the project.

Section 70-5.4.G Electrical Disturbances

There will be no electrical disturbances adversely effecting off-site equipment

associated with the completed project.

Section 70-5.4.H Historical and Archaeological Sites


19/509

16

The project is not located on a site recorded on the Massachusetts Register of

Historic Places. The project is also not considered a “major development.” The

College has complied with Williamstown’s Demolition Delay Bylaw prior to

relocation and preservation of Miller House and the demolition of Siskind House.

Section 70-5.4.I Solid Waste

Construction debris and demolition waste will be disposed of at a site assigned

solid waste facility by a commercial hauler. These arrangements will be made

directly by the contractor with oversight by the College. The exact location will

be submitted to the Building Inspector at the time of construction with the

building permit application. The completed facility will have secured trash

receptacles and the college will manage recycling and trash removal in

accordance with its standard practices and standards.

Section 70-6.1 Off-street parking and loading.

Section 70-6.1(B) Number of Spaces.

The college will seek a determination from the Planning Board that the net

addition of 19 new spaces as part of this project will provide sufficient off-street

parking. This renewal project will modernize and expand academic facilities, but

will not generate increased demand for parking. While there is no increase in

parking expected for the project, the project creates 19 new spaces to respond to

the perceived need for additional parking in the Spring Street neighborhood.

Section 70-6.1(C) -- Compliance with Development Standards for Off-Street

Parking

As described below, this project will comply with the development standards for

off-street parking spaces:

(1) Space equivalents. The parking areas will provide the required 300 square

feet of standing and maneuvering area.

(2) Location. The new and reconfigured parking spaces are provided in two

areas on the same lot as the project with access directly from Hoxsey Street, and

from Walden Street. None of the parking spaces are located within 15 feet of any

street right of way.

(3) Access. All parking spaces are provided with unobstructed access to and

from a town street and will be properly maintained. The parking areas are

designed so that vehicles will not be required nor permitted to back into a public

way. The proposed Hoxsey Street driveway is 20 feet wide and the Walden Street

driveway is 24 feet wide. Non-mountable curbs define both driveways, and their

existing entrance centerlines are appropriately spaced.


20/509

17

(4) Surfacing. All parking areas will be surfaced with at least 3 and one-half

inches of bituminous concrete over compact subgrade.

(5) Drainage. As described in the enclosed drainage plan which is included in

the separately bound permitting Plan set, stormwater runoff in the proposed parking areas will be collected in catch basins with deep sumps, routed through

water quality inlets and conveyed through properly sized pipes to municipal

drainage systems, this system complies with stormwater management standards.

(6) Lighting. The parking areas will be lit in accordance with William & Mary

pole mounted fixtures, which are Type 2 lights as defined in Section 70-5.4.D(1)

of the Bylaw. These parking area lights will be mounted at 12 feet above finished

grade.

The proposed pedestrian walkways through the site will be lit with a combination

of William & Mary pole fixtures and Type 3 bollard lights. The bollard lightswill be mounted at less than 3 feet above finished grade.

These light fixtures are consistent with College standards and bylaw overspill

requirements. They will comply with overspill limits while ensuring pedestrian

safety. See Plan L-1, Proposed Site Lighting Analysis.

Construction phase parking: Parking during the construction phase will be

provided entirely off-street, in the locations described at the logistics plan.

Construction contracts will require contractors to park in these off-street locations

rather than in public parking areas. Shuttles will be provided between the remote

construction parking areas and the project site.

VIII. Conclusion.

For the reasons described above, Williams College respectfully requests that the

Williamstown Zoning Board of Appeals:

(1) determine that it would be unreasonable, in violation of M.G.L., c. 40A, § 3,

to apply the building height limit under Bylaw § 70-4.1 to this project, and grant

Williams College permission to build the proposed North and South Additions;

(2) determine that it would be unreasonable, in violation of M.G.L., c. 40A, § 3,to apply the building coverage limits under Bylaw § 70-4.3 to this project, and

grant Williams College permission to build the proposed North and South

Additions;

(3) grant a special permit under § 70-1.4.(c) to allow the extension of a non-

conforming building, finding that it will not be substantially more detrimental to

the neighborhood than the existing structure;


21/509

18

(4) grant a special permit under § 70-5.1.B to allow a small area of cut in excess

of six feet related to the relocation of a retaining wall and loading dock.

(5) conduct the development plan review and approve of the development plans;

and

(6) grant such other relief as the ZBA may determine is warranted.


22/509

19

Exhibit A


23/509

Andrew Groff

Director / Planner

Phone/Fax: 413-458-9344

Town of Williamstown

Community Development Department 31 North Street

Williamstown, Massachusetts 01267

Friday, August 14, 2015

PROJECT: Unified Science Center, North and South Additions

LOCATION: Williams Science Quad (bounded by: Main, Spring, Hoxsey, and Walden Streets)

OWNER: Williams College

ZONING DISTRICT: General Residence

PRESENT: Andrew Groff, Jamie Art, Jason Miner, Rita Coppola Wallace, Project Design Team Representatives

Scope of Work

Based upon discussion and plans provided at the scoping session held on Tuesday July 28, 2015 it is the Community

Development Department’s understanding that this proposed project will involve a major reconfiguration of the WilliamsCollege science complex. The following changes have been proposed;

• Two additions to the existing Morley Science Center are proposed.

• The south addition will sit atop the current location of Miller House and Siskind House. Miller House will be

moved to South Street, Siskind House will be demolished.

• The new south addition will be constructed first in 2016 – 2018 and with a footprint of 18,000 s.f. and a height

from average grade of 76 feet.

• The south addition will be constructed in place of the existing 1968 Bronfman Hall.

• Bronfman will be demolished in summer 2018.

• The north addition will be constructed in 2018 – 2020 and with a footprint of just under 18,000 s.f. and a height

from average grade of 58 feet.

Permitting ducational Uses

The Zoning Enabling Act (MGL Ch. 40A) in Section 3 specifically states that no ordinance or bylaw shall: “prohibit,

regulate or restrict the use of land for educational purposes…or by a religious sect…or by a nonprofit educational

corporation; provided that such land or structures may be subject to reasonable regulations concerning the bulk and

height of structures and determining lot sizes and setbacks, open space, parking and building coverage.” It is our office’s

determination that the buildings proposed by Williams College constitute an educational use as Williams College, a not

for profit educational corporation, is the owner and operator of the proposed facilities. Additionally, the proposed

facilities are an integral piece of the education mission of the institution. These facts make the use of the land a by right

use under local zoning and Ch. 40A MGL.

Guidance on the extent to which the educational use exemption applies is found in case law. In The Bible Speaks v. Board

of Appeals of Lenox (8 Mass Ap. Ct. 19) the court determined that; “The Legislature did not intend to impose special

permit requirements designed under Massachusetts General Law Ch40A §9 … on legitimate educational uses.” The court

also determined that the portions of Lenox’s bylaw concerning reasonable bulk, dimensional, and height requirements

were valid and that an educational institution is subject to reasonable regulation as long as it does not nullify the

educational use exemption.

MGL Ch40A section 9 states that; “Zoning ordinances or by-laws shall provide for specific types of uses which shall only

be permitted in specified districts upon the issuance of a special permit. Special permits may be issued only for uses

which are in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the ordinance or by-law, and shall be subject to general or

specific provisions set forth therein; and such permits may also impose conditions, safeguards and limitations on time or

use.” The Bible Speaks case only instructs that local boards may not require use special permits, as defined by MGL


24/509

Williams College Science Quad Scoping Letter 2

Ch.40A §9 for any educational use. Case law is silent on the relationship between educational uses and special permits

for extension of non-conforming structures per MGL Ch.40A §6 as well as locally authorized special the permits intended

to grant relief from specified development standards.

Two other major cases further refined the legal test for determining how to apply “reasonable regulations”; Trustees of

Tufts College vs. City of Medford (415 MA753) and Campbell v. City of Lynn (415 MA772). In the Tufts and Campbell

cases, the court found that this power was not absolute. If the strict application of dimensional and parking standards

resulted in the nullification of the educational use, the requirement may not be enforced. This would be determined bythe Board of Appeals as an administrative appeal from the Planning Administrator’s determination. The applicant carries

the burden of demonstrating that there is a “practical prohibition” of the educational use due to the enforcement of the

regulation in question.

The Williamstown Zoning Bylaw specifically authorizes in Ch.70 §5, special permits, which can be used to obtain relief

from the development standards of §5. Additionally the Bylaw authorizes special permits for extensions of non-

conforming structures as authorized in MGL Ch.40A §6. These types of special permits are not use special permits as

defined by MGL Ch.40A §9. They are special permits specifically authorized by the Williamstown Zoning Bylaw for relief

from development or dimensional standards and therefore the ruling in Bible Speaks does not apply. If a development

standard does not constitute a “practical prohibition” of the educational use as described by Tufts and Campbell, relief

from development standards may be sought through the §5 Special Permit, or a Special Permit to extend a non-

conforming structure.

Permits Required and Required Submittals

Conservation Commission

• The site is not located in an area subject to jurisdiction by the Conservation Commission, a filing with the

Commission is not required. Please note there are extensive wetlands nearby and the project site is located in a

sensitive watershed area. The project would become jurisdictional to the Commission if nearby jurisdictional

area is negatively impacted by the project construction process.

Historical Commission

• Historical Commission review for the demolition of Siskind House and the moving of Miller House was

completed in mid-2015.

Public Works Department Approvals

• The project will require the following permits from the Department of Public Works; sewer connection and

water connection permits. It is the Community Development Department’s understanding that the Science

Quad project is not the only project within the immediate Spring Street area proposed over the next several

years. Due to the proximity of these projects to one another there is potential for serious impacts to the

neighborhood’s public utility system. Advanced planning and coordination with the Public Works Department on

this project and the remaining Spring Street area projects is necessary. Public Works Director Tim Kaiser should

be engaged on this issue at the applicant’s earliest convenience.

Planning Board Approvals

•

Parking Determination: In keeping with a long standing interpretation of the Williamstown Zoning Bylaw, ouroffice finds that use (a not for profit educational use) is unlisted by section 6 of the Zoning Bylaw and will require

a parking determination. This submittal shall include a narrative which details the parking needs of the site

including a proposed number of permanent parking spaces.

Zoning Board Approvals

SpecialPermit

• The Zoning Board of Appeals found in its granting of Special Permit 1996-34 that the existing Thompson Biology

Building is setback from the westerly property bound by 12 foot 4 inches. This section of the building does not

comply with the 15 foot yard requirement. The building legally preexisted this zoning requirement and is

therefore a legally preexisting non-conforming building. An extension of the building will have to receive a


25/509


special permit from the Zoning Board of Appeals that finds that such extension is not more detrimental to the

neighborhood than the existing structure.

• Additional Special Permits might be necessary to seek relief or compliance alternatives from Development

Standards if such relief is preferable but does not constitute a practical prohibition of an educational use.

Tufts-CampbellFindings(AdministrativeAppeal)

There are several conditions shown on the proposed plans which do not comply with the applicable requirements of the

Bylaw, these include, but are not limited to the following:

• The height of the proposed north addition (76 feet), the height of the proposed south addition (58 feet),

building coverage on site is limited to 20% of lot area. At present 30.8% of the lot is covered by buildings.

It is our determination that these aspects of the project are not permitted. Therefore relief from these dimensional

standards must be sought through the Tufts Campbell finding process. The applicant must appeal this decision that these

standards apply to the project. Case law requires the application to show the Board that the imposition of the standards

in the bylaw constitute a practical prohibition of the property’s educational use.

The Zoning Board of Appeals will require the following information for the Special Permit and Appeal hearing.

• The submission shall require a completed Application for a Hearing before the Zoning Board of Appeals, and all

plans and narrative as required for a Development Plan Review (detailed below) by the Board.

• The Appeal requires narrative detailing how enforcement of a particular development standard would result in a

practical prohibition of the proposed educational use.

• The Special Permit requires narrative detailing how the project will meet the standard of not more detrimental

to the neighborhood.

DevelopmentPlanReview

Development Plan Review will be required for this project as it involved construction of new nonresidential structures in

excess of 2,500 square feet, clearance of more than 20,000 square feet of vegetative ground cover, and substantial

alterations to parking areas for more than 10 vehicles.

The following submittals are required by the Zoning Board of Appeals in addition to a completed Application for a

Hearing.

The standard Development Plan Review documentation shall be submitted with the application.

• A locus plan as defined by §70-8.2.C

• A site plan as defined by §70-8.2.C

• Building Plans defined by §70-8.2.C

• Documentation defined by §70-8.2.C

The Development is not a Major Development, as defined by the bylaw. The additional submittals required for major

developments in §70-5 are not applicable. In accordance with §70-8.2 the site plan required for development plan

review must be prepared by a registered architect, landscape architect, professional engineer or other approved design

professional.

The following required submittals correspond to Section 5 of the Williamstown Zoning Bylaw, Development Standards, as

well as Section 6 Parking Standards. Evidence of compliance with these standards should be prepared by the project

design team and must be presented to the Zoning Board of Appeals for Development Plan Review.

• 5.2: ServiceRequirements

o 5.2.A(1) Access: Special Permit 1996-34 details specific requirements for deliveries and for construction

related traffic. These conditions must be addressed as part of this permitting process as traffic patterns

in this area have changed.

o 5.2.A(2) Traffic Study: Not applicable, the project is not a major development.


26/509


As previously noted, there are several different Spring Street area projects proposed over the

next several years. While one particular project may not have traffic impacts, all projects

together could. Future projects could also require a full study if considered major

developments. It is our office’s recommendation that, while not a requirement, the applicant

consider addressing traffic as an issue at this stage. Active communication with the Zoning

Board on this topic could provide for a more straightforward permitting process for future

projects. Further consultation with Community Development Department staff is encouraged

on this issue.o 5.2.B(1-2) Water Supply&5.2.C(1-2) Wastewater Disposal: See previous note on Public Works

Department permits.

• 5.3: EnvironmentalStandards :

o 5.3.A(1) Not applicable

o 5.3.A(2) Oil and Gas Traps in Drainage: Demonstrate compliance

o 5.3.B Storm Water Management: Demonstrate Compliance

The project will require a complete stormwater plan in compliance with this section to be

reviewed by the Zoning Board of Appeals. The plan will be evaluated using the most recent

Massachusetts Stormwater Management Policy. The use of low impact development

techniques are highly encouraged. Special attention should be paid to the downstream

implications of new stormwater runoff as the entire watershed area does drain into the

undersized Christmas Brook culvert.

o 5.3.C(1) Stabilization of Exposed Earth: Demonstrate compliance

o 5.3.C(2) An erosion control plan is required. Submission of the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan

being prepared to meet EPA requirements will be sufficient to meet this bylaw requirement.

o 5.3.C(3) Construction Requirements: Demonstrate compliance

o 5.3.C(4) Impervious Coverage Restrictions: Demonstrate compliance

o 5.3.C(5) Expert erosion report: An independently prepared erosion control plan may be required at the

discretion of the Zoning Board.

o 5.3.D: Air Quality: Demonstrate compliance

o 5.3.E: Odor: Demonstrate compliance

o 5.3.F: Plants & Animals: The project is not in an area subject to the Natural Heritage Program. Any tree

over 24”dbh to be removed will require a finding from the Board that removal of the tree is

unavoidable.

o 5.3.G: Hazardous Materials: Demonstrate compliance

• 5.4: DesignRequirements

o 5.4.A Site Design: The Zoning Board may grant a Special Permit for exemptions for these requirements if

necessary.

5.4.A(1)Visibility Reduced: Demonstrate Compliance.

5.4.A(2)Vegetation: Demonstrate Compliance

5.4.A(3)Building Orientation: Project Complies.

5.4.A(4) Existing Grade: Existing grade may be changed by no more than 6 feet. A Special

Permit is necessary for any change over 6 feet.

5.4.A(5): Site Circulation: Demonstrate Compliance.

5.4.A(6): Pedestrian Access: Demonstrate Compliance.

5.4.A(7): Not applicable

o 5.4.B Landscaping: Demonstrate compliance. The Zoning Board may authorize alternatives for

landscaping requirements in the course of performing the Development Plan Review. Please note state

highway plantings are required for the proposed north addition.

o 5.4.C Agriculture: Not applicable

o 5.4.D Lighting: Demonstrate compliance: Please submit a lighting plan.

o 5.4.E Noise Standards: Demonstrate compliance

o 5.4.F Vibration Standards: Demonstrate compliance


27/509


o 5.4.G Electrical Disturbances: Demonstrate compliance

o 5.4.H Impact on Historical Sites: Demonstrate compliance.

o 5.4.I Solid Waste Disposal: Demonstrate compliance

• 6.1: ParkingRequirements

o 6.1.B Number of Spaces: The development will have to provide off street parking spaces as required by

the Planning Board which will undertake a parking determination prior to the Zoning Board of Appeals

hearing.o 6.1.C Parking Development Standards: Demonstrate compliance with access, drainage, surfacing, and

lighting requirements for any proposed parking lot modifications. Please provide information regarding

access and construction worker parking during the construction period.

Project Phasing

It is our office’s understanding that the project will be completed over a five year period, ending in 2020. A project of this

length will require phasing of permitting. In keeping with the process used for other large scale projects the Zoning Board

will discuss the overall project concept upon initial application. The first phase of the project is the South Addition. The

initial permit application shall include full documentation for this first phase. Additionally a phasing plan shall be

submitted detailing which site elements are specific to each phase. This plan will permit the Building Commissioner’s

Office to clearly demarcate land use elements that are tied to each phase’s Certificate of Occupancy. Please highlight any

proposed phases with incomplete design or site plan elements. In the event that the initial permits are approved with

incomplete elements for future phases the applicant shall return to the Zoning Board for final approval of each additional

phase.

If you have any questions, or if I can be of further assistance, please feel free to contact us.

Sincerely,

Andrew Groff

Director / Planner


28/509

20

Exhibit B (Separately Bound)


29/509

21

Exhibit C (Separately Bound)


30/509

22

Exhibit D


31/509

Construction Fence with Scrimand Erosion Controls

Storage and Laydown

Structures to be Demolished or Relocated off-site

Corners to be Kept Back and Stabilizedto Allow Trucks to Make Turns

(Lamp Post to be Removed or Relocated)

Primary Trucking and Delivery Route

Main Construction Gate

Loading Dock toRemain Accessible

M o r l e

y D

r .

G r a c e C t .

H o x s e y S t .

S t e t s o n C t .

WILLIAMS COLLEGE SCIENCE CENTER RENESOUTH BUILDING SITE LOGISTICS - ACCESS AND PR


32/509

Barns on Den - Material La - Foreman P

Parking Garage Off North St.

Abandoned Structure L

- Parking Only

- Parking- Storage of Early Lon

PROJECT SITE

Mohawk Trail 2

Mission Park Lot on Lynde Ln.- Parking Only

WILLIAMS COLLEGE SCIENCE CENTER RENESOUTH BUILDING LOGISTICS - OFF SITE PARKING A


33/509

23

Exhibit E


34/509

S O U T H B U I L D I N G – E a

s t s i d e a t M o r l e y C i r c l e


35/509

S O U T H B U I L D I N G – S o

u t h w e s t c o r n e r a t W a l d e

n S t r e e t


36/509

N O R T H B U I L D I N G – E a s t s i d e a t Q u a d


37/509

N O R T H B U I L D I N G – N o r t h w e s t C o r n e r a t H o x s e y S t r e e t


38/509

24

Exhibit F


39/509

Williams College | Science Center Renewal

Parcel No. 98, 93 & 10

Williams College

10.8 + .20 + .47 = 11.47 Acres

499,633.00 sf

Current sf Proposed sf

Parcel No. 98

Clark 4,327 Clark 4,327

West College 763 West College 763

Morley Science Center 66,674 Morley Science Center 66,674

Lambert House 2,278 Lambert House 2,278

Jenness House 2,378 Jenness House 2,378

Hardy House 2,183 Hardy House 2,183

Rice 2,891 Rice 2,891

Jesup 6,609 Jesup 6,609

Morgan 6,485 Morgan 6,485

Bronfman 18,594 North Building 17,530

Miller House 3,362 South Building 17,970

Siskind House 2,438 ‐ ‐

Red Barn 1,282 ‐ ‐

Blue Barn 943 ‐ ‐

Parcel No. 93

ABC House 2,438 ABC House 2,438

Parcel No. 10

Chandler House 1,538 Chandler House 1,538

125,183 130,088

% Building Coverage 25.05% 26.04%


40/509


41/509


42/509


43/509


44/509


45/509


46/509


47/509


48/509


49/509


50/509


51/509


52/509


53/509


54/509


55/509


56/509


57/509


58/509


59/509


60/509


61/509


62/509


63/509


64/509


65/509


66/509


67/509


68/509


69/509


70/509


71/509


72/509

A3.N.01

1

A3.N.02 1

A3.N.01

2

1 2 5 6 7 8

D

F

B

C

E

C.5

8.71.2 32.5 4 5.5

A3.N.02

4.5

A3.N.02

6.5

B.5

8.1

730SFCOMPUTERLAB

470SF

THINSECTIONROOM

790SFCOMPUTERLAB

870SFMAINELECTRICAL

vending

2 ' - 2 "

1 0 ' - 3 "

1 8 ' - 2 "

3 ' - 4 "

2 7 ' - 5 "

1 0 ' - 0 "

2 7 ' - 0 "

2 ' - 2 "

240SFFIELDSTORAGE

F.D

40SFJAN.CL.

60EM.ELE

220SFROCK STORAGE

ACCESSIBLELIFT

vending

F.D.

UP

UP

FOOTPRINTOFEXISTINGBRONFMANBUILDINGTOBEDEMOLISHED

1060SFCLASSROOM

960SFCLASSROOM

600SFBUILDINGSTORAGE

20'-1"1'-0"28'-0"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"20'-8"5'-4"

3220SF

AUDITORIUM200SEATS

70SF Auditorium Prep.

190SF

AUDITORIUMSTORAGE

1 0 0 ' - 6 "

208'-8 1/2"

34

U P

U P


73/509

A3.N.01

1

A3.N.02 1

A3.N.01

2

1 2 5 6 7 8

D

F

B

C

E

C.5

8.71.2 32.5 4 5.5

A3.N.02

4.5

A3.N.02

6.5

B.5

8.1

820SF

TEACHINGLABOCEANOGRAP

980SFCLASSROOM

940SFCLASSROOM

500SF

GROUPDYNAMICSROOM

100SFPSYCH.STORAGE

290SFWORK ROOMTeachingLabB1

320SFWORK ROOMTeachingLabB2

120SFELECT.CLOSET

80SFCONTROL ROOM

70SFCONTROL ROOM

70SF

RESTROOM/SHOWER

40SFRESTROOM

40SFRESTROOM

150SFSTAFFOFFICE

150SFSTAFFOFFICE

mechanicalshaft

mechanicalshaft

100SFMATHSTORAGE

520SFCOMPUTERLAB

DN

50SFRESTROOM

120SELECT.CL

LIGHTWELLBELOW LIGHTWELLBELOW

UP

90SIT

30SFJAN.CL.

1 0 ' - 3 "

1 8 ' - 2 "

3 ' - 4 "

2 7 ' - 5 "

1 0 ' - 0 "

2 7 ' - 0 "

2 ' - 2 "

1050SFSHELL SPACE

640SFCLASSROOM

140SF

CLASSROOMSTORAGE

350SFWORK ROOMTeachingLabA1

40SFTESTROOM

30SFTESTROOM

30SFTESTROOM

40SFTESTROOM

30SFTESTROOM

30SFTESTROOM

30SFTESTROOM

30SFTESTROOM

360SFWORK ROOMTeachingLabA2

30SFTESTROOM

30SFTESTROOM

30SFTESTROOM

40SFTESTROOM

30SFTESTROOM

54

54

400SFSHELL SPACE

20'-1"1'-0"28'-0"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"20'-8"5'-4"2'-2"

214'- 0"

2920SFCORRIDOR

1 0 0 ' - 6 "

34


74/509


75/509

A3.N.01

1

A3.N.02 1

A3.N.01

2

1 2 5 6 7 8

D

F

B

C

E

C.5

8.71.2 32.5 4 5.5

A3.N.02

4.5

A3.N.02

6.5

B.5

8.1

650SF

TEACHINGLAB:SEDIMENTOLOGY

420SF

PSYCH.SEMINARROOM

90SFELECT.CLOSET

100SFCOPYROOM

180SFSTAFFOFFICE

180SFSTAFFOFFICE

180SFFACULTYOFFICE

180SFFACULTYOFFICE

180SFFACULTYOFFICE

180SFFACULTYOFFICE

190SFFACULTYOFFICE

190SFFACULTYOFFICE

190SFFACULTYOFFICE

180SFFACULTYOFFICE

120SF

FLEX/VISITOROFFICE

30SFJAN.CL.

40SFRESTROOM

40SFRESTROOM

560SF

GEOSCIENCERESEARCHLAB

180SFFACULTYOFFICE

180SF ADMINOFFICE

110SFKITCHENETTE

1560SF

PSYCH.LIBRARY

50SFRESTROOM

EquipmentZone

480SF

SCIENCECENTERSEMINARROOM

180SF

FLEX/VISITOROFFICE

40SFSTORAGE

mechanicalshaft360SF

CLASSROOM

180SFFACULTYOFFICE

180SFFACULTYOFFICE

180SFFACULTYOFFICE

180SFFACULTYOFFICE

190SFFACULTYOFFICE

DN

mechanicalshaft

40SFSTORAGE

90

ELE70SF

RESTROOM/SHOWER

230SFLOUNGE

930SFENTRY

1060SFCORRIDOR

470SFCORRIDOR

340SF

CORRIDOR

UP

mechanicalshaft

2 ' - 2 "

1 0 ' - 3 "

1 8 ' - 2 "

3 ' - 4 "

2 7 ' - 5 "

1 0 ' - 0 "

2 7 ' - 0 "

2 ' - 2 "

1 0 0 ' - 6 "

180SFFACULTYOFFICE

170SFFACULTYOFFICE

120SFPROJECTROOM

20'-1"1'-0"28'-0"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"20'-8"5'-4"2'-2"

214'- 0"

180SFFACULTYOFFICE

34


76/509

R O O F

A3.N.01

1

A3.N.02 1

A3.N.01

2

1 2 5 6 7 8

D

F

B

C

E

C.5

8.1.2 32.5 4 5.5

A3.N.02

4.5

A3.N.02

6.5

B.5

8.1

200SFFACULTYOFFICE

200SFFACULTYOFFICE

200SFFACULTYOFFICE

210SFFACULTYOFFICE

210SFFACULTYOFFICE

200SFFACULTYOFFICE

200SFFACULTYOFFICE

200SFFACULTYOFFICE

200SFFACULTYOFFICE

200SFFACULTYOFFICE

200SFFACULTYOFFICE

200SFFACULTYOFFICE

210SFFACULTYOFFICE

200SFFACULTYOFFICE

200SFFACULTYOFFICE

200SFFACULTYOFFICE

220SFFACULTYOFFICE

200SF ADMINOFFICE

150SFCOPYROOM

480SF

MATHSEMINARROOM

110SFKITCHENETTE

560SF

GEOSCIENCERESEARCHLAB

90SIT

120SELECT.C

30SFJAN.CL.

40SFRESTROOM

40SFRESTROOM

70SF

RESTROOM/SHOWER

120SFFLEXOFFICE

50SFRESTROOM

590SF

STATS/APPLIEDMATHLAB

650SF

TEACHINGLAB:STRUCTURAL

GEOLOGY

opentobelow

mechanicalshaftmechanicalshaft

40SFSTORAGE

DN

930SFENTRY

360SFCORRIDOR

260SF

CORRIDOR

mechanicalshaft790SFCORRIDOR

2 ' - 2 "

1 0 ' - 3 "

1 8 ' - 2 "

3 ' - 4 "

2 7 ' - 5 "

1 0 ' - 0 "

2 7 ' - 0 "

2 ' - 2 "

1 0 0 ' - 6 "

210SFFACULTYOFFICE

200SFFACULTYOFFICE

2050SF

MATHLIBRARY

90SF

ELECTRICALCLOSET

80SFPROJECTROOM

80SFPROJECTROOM

120SFFLEXOFFICE

20'-1"1'-0"28'-0"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"20'-8"5'-4"2'-2"

214'- 0"

34


77/509


78/509


79/509

UP

1

2

3

4

5

7

8

9

10

A B C D E F G H ID.4 E.7

6

4.1

2.9

A.5 I.5

4.6

11

4.8

A.1

11.1

2.1

10.2

9.7

8.7

7.7

6.4

H.9

A3.S.02

1

A3.S.01

2

A3.S.02 2

21' -6" 21' -6" 10' -9" 21' -6" 21' -6" 21' -6" 10' -9" 21' -6" 21' -6"

176'- 4"

110SF

IT

60SF

JAN

420SF

MAINELECTRICAL

ROOM

1480SF

MECHANICAL

460SF

LOADING

130SF

SCIENCECENTER

STAFFOFFICE

260SF

TEM

260SF

SEM

130SF

FACILITIESSTAFF

OFFICE

130SF

IMAGINGSTAFF

OFFICE

60SF

IMAGINGSUPPOR

ANDSTORAGE

110SF

HIGHSPEED

IMAGINGCAMERA

2980SF

MAIN/WOODSHOP250SF

MATERIALSSUPPLY

340SF

ELECTRICSHOP

120SF

WELDINGAREA

80SF

PAINTBOOTH

270SF

OFFICE/SHOP

CLASSROOM

100SF

WASTESTORAGE

100SF

RECYCLING

80SF

SPECIALTYEQUIP

ROOM

40SF

BALANCERM

50SF

LN2STORAGE

60SF

EMER.ELEC

200SF

SHOPVESTIBULE

250SF

VESTIBULE

480SF

CORRIDOR

370SF

CORRIDOR

200SF

CORRIDOR

200SF

PLUMBING

210SF

CORRIDOR

LINEOFBUILDINGABOVE

CRAWLSPACEBENEATH

LOADINGDOCKFOR

ENTRANCEOFSITE

UTILITIES

GENERATOR

6 ' - 0 "

2 4 ' - 0 "

1 1 '

- 0 "

3 0 ' - 0 "

1 1 ' - 0 "

1 0 ' - 6 "

2 1 ' - 0 "

2 1 ' - 0 "

2 1 ' - 0 "

1 0 ' - 6 "

6 9 ' - 4 "

4 1 ' - 2 "


80/509

UP

UP

UP

1

2

3

4

5

7

8

9

10


6

4.1

2.9

A.5 I.5

4.6

11

4.8

A.1

11.1

2.1

10.2

9.7

8.7

7.7

6.4

H.9

A3.S.02

1

A3.S.01

2

A3.S.02 2

21' - 6" 21' - 6" 10' - 9" 21' - 6" 21' - 6" 21' - 6" 10' - 9" 21' - 6" 21' - 6"

176'- 4"

6 ' - 0 "

2 4 ' - 0 "

1 1 '

- 0 "

3 0 ' - 0 "

1 1 ' - 0 "

1 0 ' - 6 "

2 1 ' - 0 "

2 1 ' - 0 "

2 1 ' - 0 "

1 0 ' - 6 "

7 5 '

- 4 "

9 5 ' - 0 "

LINEOFLOADINGDOCKANDBASEMENTBELOW

58'-7"

150SF

ELECTRICAL

30SF

JAN

180SF

PHYSICSOFFICE

170SF

CHEMISTRYOFFICE

180SF

PHYSICSOFFICE

180SF

PHYSICSOFFICE

180SF

PHYSICSOFFICE

180SF

PHYSICSOFFICE

170SF

PHYSICSOFFICE

180SF

PHYSICSOFFICE

240SF

MACHINESHOP

SUPPORT

590SF

RESEARCHLAB

640SF

RESEARCHLAB 640SF

RESEARCHLAB640SF

SCIENCECENTER

FLEXLAB 300SF

SCIENCECENTER

FLEXSUPPORTLAB

620SF

SCIENCECENTER

FLEXLAB

660SF

SCIENCECENTER

FLEXLAB

600SF

SCIENCECENTER

FLEXLAB600SF

RESEARCHLAB

300SF

SUPPORTLAB610SF

RESEARCHLAB630SF

RESEARCHLAB

290SF

SUPPORTLAB

330SF

RESEARCHLAB

360SF

RESEARCHLAB

670SF

STUDENTSTUDY

170SF

STUDENTSTU

160SF

STUDENTSTUDY

130SF

PROJECTROOM

230SF

STUDENTSTUDY

90SF

VESTIBULE

90SF

VESTIBULE

30SF

PUMPROOM

64' - 3" 53' - 6"


81/509

UPDN

UP

1

2

3

4

5

7

8

9

10


6

4.1

2.9

A.5 I.5

4.6

11

4.8

A.1

11.1

2.1

10.2

10.2

9.7 9.7

8.7 8.7

7.7 7.7

6.4 6.4

H.9

A3.S.02

1

A3.S.01

2

A3.S.02 2

58'-7"

1 ' - 7 "

6 ' - 0 "

2 4 ' - 0 "

1

1 ' - 0 "

3 0 ' - 0 "

1 1 ' - 0 "

1 0 ' - 6 "

2 1 ' - 0 "

2 1 ' - 0 "

2 1 ' - 0 "

1 0 ' - 6 "

21' -6" 21' -6" 10' -9" 21' -6" 21' -6" 21' -6" 10' -9" 21' -6" 21' -6"

176'- 4"

7

5 ' - 4 "

9 5 ' - 0 "

600SF

RESEARCHLAB

670SF

RESEARCHLAB

620SF

RESEARCHLAB310SF

TISSUECULTURE

SHAREDLAB

640SF

RESEARCHLAB

600SF

RESEARCHLAB

640SF

RESEARCHLAB

610SF

RESEARCHLAB

70SF

IT

150SF

ELECTRICAL

30SF

JAN

180SF

CHEMISTRYOFFICE

170SF

CHEMISTRYOFFICE

180SF

CHEMISTRYOFFICE

180SF

CHEMISTRYOFFICE

180SF

CHEMISTRYOFFICE

180SF

BIOLOGYOFFICE

180SF

BIOLOGYOFFICE

170SF

BIOLOGYOFFICE

130SF

BIOCHEM

MICROSCOPY

100SF

COLDROOM

90SF

EQUIPMENTROOM

210SF

CHEMISTRYOFFICE

390SF

EQUIPMENTROOM

630SF

RESEARCHLAB

600SF

RESEARCHLAB

310SF

EQUIPMENT/

STORAGE

CORRIDOR

310SF

ORGANICCHEM

SUPPORTROOM

300SF

BIOCHEM

ANALYTICAL LAB

170SF

STUDENTST

170SF

STUDENTSTUDY

100SF

SCIENCECENTER

STAFFOFFICE

90SF

COPYROOM

140SF

PROJECTALCOVE

150SF

STUDENTSTUDY

110SF

STUDENTSTUDY

140SF

KITCHENETTE

64' -3" 53' -6"


82/509

DN

1

2

3

4

5

7

8

9

10

A B C D E F

G

G H I

D.4

D.4

E.7

E.7

6

4.1

2.9

A.5 I.5

4.6

11

4.8

A.1

11.1

2.1

10.2

9.7

8.7

7.7

6.4

H.9

A3.S.02

1

A3.S.01

2

A3.S.02 2

6 ' -

0 "

2 4 ' -

0 "

1 1 ' -

0 "

3 0 ' -

0 "

1 1 ' -

0 "

1 0 ' -

6 "

2 1 ' -

0 "

2 1 ' -

0 "

2 1 ' -

0 "

1 0 ' -

6 "

21' - 6" 21' - 6" 10' - 9" 21' - 6" 21' - 6" 21' - 6" 10' - 9" 21' - 6" 21' - 6"

7 5 ' -

4 "

9 5 ' -

0 "

176'-4"

8 ' - 6"

480SF

RESEARCHLAB

120SF

FLYSUPPORTLAB

460SF

RESEARCHLAB

660SF

RESEARCHLAB

590SF

RESEARCHLAB

70SF

IT

150SF

ELECTRICAL

30SF

JAN

180SF

BIOLOGYOFFICE

170SF

BIOLOGYOFFICE

180SF

BIOLOGYOFFICE

180SF

BIOLOGYOFFICE

180SF

BIOLOGYOFFICE

180SF

SCIENCECENTER

OFFICE

180SF

SCIENCECENTER

OFFICE

170SF

SCIENCECENTER

OFFICE

620SF

RESEARCHLAB

640SF

RESEARCHLAB

600SF

RESEARCHLAB

490SF

RESEARCHLAB

120SF

AUTOCLAVE

390SF

EQUIPMENTROOM

220SF

BIOLOGYOFFICE

180SF

CHEMTEACHING

SUPPORTLAB

1290SF

BIOCHEM

TEACHINGLAB

530SF

BIOLOGYSEMINAR

180SF

BIOSUPPORTLAB

100SF

SCIENCECENTER

FLEXOFFICE

170SF

STUDENTSTUDY

160SF

STUDENTSTUD

10SF

EMER.ELEC

90SF

PROJECTROOM

70SF

FLYWETLAB

130SF

PROJECTROOM

130SF

PROJECTALCOVE

9 5 ' -

0 "

64' - 3" 58' - 7" 53' - 6"


83/509

1

2

3

4

5

7

8

9

10


6

4.1

2.9

A.5 I.5

4.6

11

4.8

A.1

11.1

2.1

10.2

9.7

8.7

7.7

6.4

H.9

A3.S.02

1

A3.S.01

2

A3.S.02 2

4940SF

MECHANICAL ROOM

40SF

ELEVATOR

CONTROLLER

ROOMCFMF

6 ' - 0 "

2 4 ' - 0 "

1

1 ' - 0 "

3 0 ' - 0 "

1 1 ' - 0 "

1 0 ' - 6 "

2 1 ' - 0 "

2 1 ' - 0 "

2 1 ' - 0 "

1 0 ' - 6 "

21' - 6" 21' - 6" 10' - 9" 21' - 6" 21' - 6" 21' - 6" 10' - 9" 21' - 6" 21' - 6"

DN

7

5 ' - 4 "

8 8 ' - 4 1 / 4 "

6 ' - 7

3 / 4 "

9 5 ' - 0 "

1 0 ' - 6 "

2 1 ' - 0 "

2 1 ' - 0 "

2 1 ' - 0 "

1 0 ' - 6 "

2 ' - 2 "

2 ' - 4 "

58'-7"

77' - 5" 77' -5"

176'- 4"

1

2

3

4

5

A B C

6

4.1

2.9

A.5

4.6

4.8

A.1

2.1

7 5 ' - 4 "

SCALE: 1/16"=1'-0"2

PENTHOUSEROOF


84/509


85/509


86/509

STORMWATER REPORT

For

WILLIAMS COLLEGESCIENCE CENTER RENEWAL PROJECT

Williamstown, Massachusetts

Prepared for:

PAYETTE290 Congress Street, 5th Floor

Boston, MA 02210-1005

Prepared by:

NITSCH ENGINEERING, INC.2 Center Plaza, Suite 430

Boston, MA 02108-1928

120 Front Street Suite 820Worcester, MA 01608

Nitsch Project #10942

December 18, 2015


87/509


88/509

Williams College Science Center December 18, 2015Nitsch Project #10942

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 1

2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS ................................................................................................. 1

2.1 Existing Drainage Infrastructure ....................................................................................... 1

2.2 NRSC Soil Designations .................................................................................................. 2

2.3 Onsite Soil Explorations ................................................................................................... 2

3.0 PROPOSED CONDITIONS ............................................................................................. 3

3.1 Project Description ....

Documents

Williams College Science Quad Proposal