(V An Application to the City of Hallowell for a MASTER PLAN for the STEVENS SCHOOL Submitted under Chapter 9 Land Use Control, Division F, Stevens School Planned Development District Sections 9-386 through 9?392 of the Revised Code of Ordinances, City of Hallowell, as Revised July 2015 Submitted by Mastway Development LLC A MASTER PLAN for STEVENS SCHOOL to be renamed September, 2016 U2 Fiji al? . A x11- - w. . -- 1.. m'wn?l I) Mastway evelopment LLC. 7 2 Burtons Lane Winthrop, ME 04364 207-441-1538 September 10, 2016 Danielle Obery, Chair Planning Board Hallowell City Hall 1 Winthrop Street Hallowell, ME 04347 Re: A Master Plan for Stevens School Dear Chairwoman Obery: It is with pleasure that we submit this application to you for the Board?s consideration. We are proud of our Conceptual Master Plan proposal and trust you will find that it is complete and responds to Hallowell?s Code of Ordinances requirements. We appreciate the City?s efforts to work with us to revitalize this long dormant, historic property. Please contact us if you have questions or concerns. We stand ready to help. Sincerely, Matt Morrill President, Mastway Development, LLC MASTER PLAN CONTENTS Cover Page Letter of Transmittal Table of Contents Part 1. Master Plan Summary A. The Vision B. Project Goals C. Project Location See Map D. Plan Description Land Use Map, See Map Access and Roads Map, See Map (MP-3) Sidewalks, Trails and Open Space, See Map E. Master Plan, See Map (MP-5) full size, scaled prints are available at City Hall F. Plan Facts and Figures G. Illustrative Site Plan, See Map Part 2. Master Plan Description A. Introduction B. Application Requirements C. Consistency with Comprehensive Plan D. Site Inventory Site Description Site Survey, See Map (MP-7) Site History Existing Buildings Inventory Existing Site Plan, See Map 99.09?? E. Site Analysis a. Site Characteristics - Adjacent Roads and Land Uses, See Map (MP-9) Site Topography, See Map Site Soils, See Map Tree Inventory and Site Vegetation, See Map l) Aerial Photograph of Site, See Map Site Watersheds, See Map Traf?c Analysis b. Site Opportunities and Constraints 0. Site Opportunities and Constraints Plan, See Map F. Conceptual Master Plan Master Plan Description Development Areas and Land Uses, See Map Master Plan Access and Road System, See Map (MP-16) Master Plan Sidewalks, Trails, and Open Space, See Map Lighting and Landscaping Site Utilities, See Map (MP-18) Master Plan Development Parcels A Public/Private Partnership Development Phasing, Marketing, and Financing Conceptual Master Plan, See Maps MP-20) full size, scaled prints are available at City Hall *?r'ameogop?s G. Master Plan DeveIOpment Standards Part 3. Master Plan Supporting Materials A. Acknowledgements Consulting Team Site Photos Letters from Natural Areas Program, and Maine Historic Preservation .U .0 Traf?c Report F11 Utilities Report F. Historic District PART 1. MASTER PLAN SUMMARY A. The Vision Over time Stevens Commons will become a model mixed?use development known for its quality environment, historic buildings, landscaped campus, and superior services. The mix of offices and commercial space will be complimented by permanently conserved, open space and a range of residential offerings, including senior housing, apartments, duplexes, and small lot, clustered subdivisions. In addition to its on-site features Stevens Commons will contribute to the Hallowell community with the tax revenue it generates and with generous public open space and attractive trails that link it to adjacent open space, the elementary school, and connecting streets and sidewalks. Stevens Commons is a landmark development that will enhance the quality of the life of residents, tenants, and the public. Not only will a historic piece of Hallowell?s past be revitalized and reenergized, but the new residential offerings will add to quality housing choices in this unique community. An artist?s impression of the revitalized Stevens Commons as seen from Winthrop Street. The restored buildings face a landscaped public common and are served by the improved Beech Street and Coos Lane. B. Project Goals All development and conservation initiatives at Stevens Commons will be guided by the following overarching goals. They are drawn from Hallowell?s Comprehensive Plan, the City?s Stevens School Planned Development District guidelines, and the developer?s vision for this unique, historically significant property. 0 Provide a mix of appropriate and compatible land uses, including residential, business, commercial, and recreational uses. 0 Retain the historic character of the properties landmark buildings and grou "ds. 0 Ensure that all development creates a quality environment and exhibits con ?Ion set of design elements. 0 Provide the infrastructure needed to support development and ger rat ax revP ue over the long term. 0 Permanently conserve those areas of the site with except- ?Ial .tural qualities and public value. 0 Connect to the surrounding properties, streets, and 'qhborho. is, where appropriate, with sidewalks, trails, and/or vehicular connectionr 0 Link the site (and the existing Stevens field) to the iiacv 1.. Howard Hill forested park and to Winthrop Street; assure public access. Buffer adjacent properties where there may .egi ive visual impacts. 0 Design and engineer the development 5 i as to handle stormwater on-site and avoid off- site impacts. Cluster new residential subdivisic 5. there is easy access to open space and trials. Phase development by workin ?wit partners and responding to market opportunities. Collaborate with the City of "alloy. 1 to meet City goals and provide essential infrastructure. 0 Comply with the ity Cor nensive Plan and Master Plan application requirements. An artist ?5 impression of the revitalized Stevens Commons as seen from the middle of the Campus/Beech Street C. Project Location Located two minutes from downtown Hallowell on Winthrop Street, at the top of the hill, Stevens School is within the City?s official ?urban? area. The site is served by City sewer and water services and, in places, enjoys scenic views over the Kennebec River valley. The Stevens Commons site has distinct locational advantages within the region that enhance its development prospects (See Map, These values include: good, easy access to Interstate 295 and Augusta?s airport; an excellent school system; immediate proximity to the Legislature and State Capital; proximity to Augusta?s new l64?acre Howard Hill park; well?managed City government and an involved citizenry; a dynamic, historic downtown on the Kennebec just minutes away; the Kennebec River Rail Trail; and shopping centers on Western Avenue and the Whitten Road. W1 NTHROP DOWNTOWN MANCHESTER LAKE CAR DEALERSHIPS TURNPIKE - ?70 an. MALL ALLOWELL GRANITE WHITT EN ?5 aucusu AUGUSTA VAUQHN FHALLOWELL AIRPORT ?0.305 - MARKETPLACE . AUGUSTA FARMINGDALE Ham?) HILL a CONSERVATION i AREA 2 _z Uni I t; 4 STATE 3 HOUSE comma-c CHELSEA ??55 ?23 6" AUGUSTA STATE .94! EAST CAMPUS - '5 in? OFFICES ST. 20,: 1 Stevens Commons central location in the immediate region will be advantageous to its residents, tenants, and the Hallowell community. D. Plan Description The redevelopment of the Stevens School Campus is one of utmost importance to the City of Hallowell. The campus, currently ?anked by varying types of housing, municipal and educational facilities, as well as conservation land, will be put to new uses which should enhance and benefit the surrounding neighborhoods and the City as a whole. Imagine a variety of housing options from affordable rental units to single and multi? family homes to luxury condominiums all situated in and amongst professional of .ce space and commercial and service businesses. All of this will be interconnected vr 'i a network of streets, sidewalks, and hiking trails that provide safe travel for p? res. 'ans, as well as public access to the newly acquired Howard Hill Conservation area ?d ti elementary school. Stevens Commons Master Plan can best be understood by 1c \?ing . its nponent parts. The overall plan comprises five distinct and inter?related areas .5 map, linked by roads, sidewalks, trails, and utilities and supported by LA an space. Each of the ?ve areas (A through E) has its own attrib es, ed on careful site analyses; each supports specific land uses, as described belc A- ?1 .re a road system and open space. The accompanying ?Land Use? map sho? the ??ve development areas; the table below summarizes the land?use program for 3h. Area Description .ld Uses Area A Historic Stevens Campus Offices, apartments, commercial, and (next to Winthrop Street) institutional Area The Extended CampI Senior housing (north of Area A) Area Phase 1 Re' .1th .l Clustered single-family homes and (north of Area B) duplexes Area Phase 2 Residei 'al Clustered single?family homes (west of Area Phase 3 res lential Clustered single?family homes (west of ?Sc. -reet) rov1ding ss to and serving these five areas is an upgraded street system and utilities Me water, gas, electricity, and fiber optics. The road and utilities serving Areas A, B, and are to be built with City bond funds. The remaining roads, in Areas and B, will be built by the developer and dedicated to the City. (See Map, MP-3) Supporting the aforementioned development is some 20 acres of open space land (See Map, The nature of the open space is dictated, in large part, by the sites historic and natural features. The table below describes the open space components. Open Space Feature and Location Comment 1. Historic Quad or Common (Area A) 0.65 acres of common, restored and landscaped 2. Oak Grove Park (Area B) 0.70 acres of common with magni?cent oak trees 3. Stevens Pond (next to Areas D) A small pond with buffer; a natural area 4. Stevens Field and Woods (next to Area pond) A large hayed ?eld surrounded by woods with access to Howard Hill (:11 acres) 5. Wooded Slope (between Areas A, and Area on Pleasant St.) Extensive (:12 acres) woods covering very steep slopes Coursing through the open space and providing links to adjacent areas, are some 4400 linear feet of hiking/walking trails. These trails are tied into the Commons sidewalks and link up with Winthrop Street, Pleasant and Page Streets, the elementary school, and Howard Hill?s trail system (See Map, Sidewalks, Trails and Open Space). Multi-Age Village Connections Onsite Amenities and Services New Housing Options in Historic Buildings . ?fEl. 00A MIXED USES HISTORIC CAMPUS MIXED USE RESIDENTAIL PHASE 1 RESIDENTIAL 3:00:RESIDENTIAL OPEN SPACE SUBDIVISIONS 5 PHASE 1 RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS PHASE 3 STEVENG COMMONQ MASTER PLAN DRAWN W: IDATE: a?z?I? smjs I"=l5d .. - a . . . ?v PLEASANT STREET PROPOEED CITY ATERNATE PRIVATE STREET6 PRIVATELY smears EXISTING 0er Z) 6TEVEN6 COMMONQ MASTER PLAN MOESS 8c ROADS MAP DRAWN bY: um IPATE: b?l?I? [er/ME: raw was WOWARD TRAL5 VIA 5? a ?Jargm N5 STEVENS 6. I 000? 000? oo? (OI RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION llSTEVENS 6W5 spas/N55 INTO 0? 0? 0 a a co STREET 8: I I RESIDENTIAL COMMO SUBDIVISION wrn-I . WARD HILL TRAIL SYSTEM I64 MRE a" MWVEP AREA OPEN SPACE TRAILS LINKS 6 DIOYCLE 5: u< 0 WWNTOWN HALLOWEJ. OPEN SPME RAIL TRAL 5 RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION I TRAIL-HEAD o? I WITH PARKINS GTEVENG OOMMONS MASTER PLAN II 0 ,l I. 3? SIDEWALKS, TRAILS 8: OPEN 5PME MAP Ne DRAWN DY: Mm IDATE: raw I 5mm E. Master Plan Map This is the conceptual Master Plan (See Map, that is described in greater detail in Part 2. This Plan, along with an accompanying narrative, exhibits, and speci?c Development Standards, when approved by the Hallowell Planning Board and the City Council, comprise the document against which all future development proposals for Stevens Commons will be evaluated. Although conceptual in nature the Master Plan documents provide a ?road map? or ?blueprint? the Planning Board can use to make sure subsequent deveIOpment remains faithful to the Master Plan concepts. ELEMENTARY 1? 11ME TIME 1 HALLOWELL WARNER WARNER OVERLOOK 2.10 ACRES 1.99 Acus 1.HOWARD HILL 5 0/ PRESERVE 5- I +/-164 ACRES .I if 2 Il? ?ST?wt? 0 HA?le?ngL 1.95 (4.1 7 wru" mm ml 1.31?: r/ WOODED 00N6ERVAT10N AREAS '1 PROPOSED REQIDENTAIL AREA6 .. I. .. rJ NEW 5TRU6TURE6 I. .- PROPOQED NEW LOT LINE5 PROPOQED ROAD RIQHT WAY 5TEVEN5 OWMOMS MASTER PLAN ?5 ?my 5TREET I i I - MASTER mum-E mu. -- . . A MON DRAWN W: DATE: EOALE: 2% mm REV. REV. DATE: REV. gm ?mww?rmm and functionally Inbound whllo providing podul?an connoc?vlly. I New Forwell Building New Senior Housing C005 Lane Cleveland Building Winll-nrop Stevens Build inf] Common Common .. .- .-. -4- -. 3?3 v: In gut-RP K. ?4 3? W382 live an Id ?13 each freel- LOpen Space Baker Building 7AM. i Trail h: Fills: Cenlral Building Mainlenance 51:13. Erskine Building Flagg- Dummer Building New Senior. Housan Illustrative Slle Plan S?d n+Ml . n-Residen?al Duplex EDSeHior/Adap?vc H53. Residen?al S. Famll? PART 2. MASTER PLAN DESCRIPTION A. Introduction Part 2 of this Master Plan application responds directly to the submission requirements spelled out in the City?s Code of Ordinances. The purpose of the ?Stevens School Planned Development District,? as described in the Code, is: ?To provide for the reuse and redevelopment of the former Stevens School into a well- planned development with a common set of design elements in which the use, redevelopment, or development is focused in the areas of the campus that are already developed in a manner that is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood, accommodates a mix of uses, maintains the character of the Maine Industrial School for Girls National Register Historic District, minimizes development in areas with significant natural resources, provides appropriate infrastructure, addresses environmental issues and stormwater management, and minimizes undesirable impacts on adjacent properties and the surrounding neighborhood.? Section 9?392 describes the Master Plan phase of a ?Planned Mixed-Use Development? in this way: ?The Master Plan Phase involves the preparation, review, and approval of a conceptual master plan for the overall Planned Mixed- Use Development and the development standards that will apply to individual buildings, subdivisions, or phases of the development. Approval of the Master Plan and development standards must occur before any application is submitted for site plan review or subdivision approval. B. Application Requirements The Code stipulates that the Master Plan shall be for the entire site, as has been done here. It also requires that the Plan include five elements: Development narrative. Site inventory and analysis. Conceptual land use plan. Conceptual infrastructure plan. Development and dimensional standards. This document addresses all of these elements, in detail, with narrative, maps, diagrams, and tables. Part 3 contains additional information. C. Consistency with Hallowell?s Comprehensive Plan The Master Plan meets the Comprehensive Plan?s goals for the Stevens School site. First and foremost the Master Plan follows Hallowell?s overarching goal, specifically: ?Create a Master Plan that achieves appropriate housing, business, and public uses; good jobs; open space and trails; minimal traffic impacts; environmental quality; neighborhood quality?of?life; and property tax revenues.?1 Beyond that, the Master Plan responses affirmatively to the 14 goals listed in the Comprehensive Plan, as shown below: Comprehensive Plan Goal Summary Master Plan Response 1. Resolve environmental issues Determined/t0 be done upon building re-develop 2. Resolve any stormwater problems to be done 3. Protect valued natural resources achieved (see Plan) 4. Retain as much existing open space as possible achieved (see Plan) 5. Offer opportunities for trails achieved (see Plan) 6. Focus new development in existing built?out areas achieved (see Plan) 7. Provide a range of housing types and designs compatible with adjacent neighborhoods achieved 8. Avoid retail businesses that take away business from downtown see D.d. table 9. Preserve the historic character and respect that setting to be done 10. Allow for city and school facilities on site already achieved 11. Ensure traffic generated can be accommodated on Winthrop Street see traffic analysis 12. Provide streets and sidewalks that connect to Winthrop to be done Street. 13. Do not connect any roads to Augusta done 14. Connect all development to public water and sewer to be done 1 2010 Hallowell Comprehensive Plan Update, page IV. 10 D. Site Inventory 3. Site Description The existing site is best described in the two accompanying maps the ?Site Survey? and the ?Existing Site Plan? as well as the other maps (referenced below) in the Site Analysis (Section E). Together they show, along with the narrative: a) the project name, north arrow, date, and scale; b) site boundaries; c) existing easements; d) topography (See Map, e) key natural features; f) soils (See Map, 10); g) vegetative cover (See Maps, MP?ll h) watershed boundaries (See Map, i) existing buildings, streets, stone walls, driveway j) building locations; k) existing utilities (See Map, 1) natural environmental constraints (See Ma b. Site Survey Map (see Map 7, TIL shows the entire 54-acre property. c. Site History Area A represents the historic 11y moortant site of Stevens School, also known as ?Maine Industrial School for -- 01 rate School for Girls in Hallowell.? Given that this campu. a designated National Register of Historic Places site it is worth documenting its essential ?atures. (A detailed description of the history of each building is provided in l? n. The histc .. 'te r. .udes 5 buildings: Baker, Central, Stevens, Erskine, and the Adminis axon )uilding. (The Farwell house to the west is not included.) The ,dmir?ic'tra A Building is a wood frame, clapboard structure in the Colonial Revival s' '11 four others are brick and granite and draw on Colonial Revival and Classical Rev' styles. The positioning of the long Stevens building helps create the large common onto which the Erskine and Central buildings face. The Maine Industrial School for Girls was founded in 1874 by the State as a place where ?wayward? girls could be housed and given a moral, social, and academic education. Over the years the schools mission changed from education to a reform institution. It closed in the early 19205. 11 d. Existing Buildings Inventory Existing Building Inventory2 (see Map 8) Name Footprint Total Potential Uses Condition/Comments (sf) Floor Area (sf) 1. Farwell 12,400 3,100 commercial, store, poor; 1% ?oors; services clapboard; older house 2. Stevens 4,700 17,936 multi-use, office, historic; bric, .3 11( us residential, community, retail, hotel 3. Administration 1,600 4,572 of?ces 1 1r: A rent ital; wood fra .1istoric;2 1/2 I ?oors 4. Baker 4,650 11,330 professional I good; 2 1/2 story brick; offices; rt ?dential historic 5. Central 9,200 24,778 residen a1, fair; 3 story brick; educatit a1. historic o" Lce_ 6. Erskine Hall 4,150 9,098 0 -mr rity poor condition; historic I C?nter, Fi 3 Station, Hotel 7. Flagg?Dummer 8,352 8,3; residential; fair; single story; brick congregate or senior housing 8. Cleveland 6,061 _r 0,361 residential; good; single story; brick I congregate or senior housing 9. Hayden 6,r 2 6,282 residential; Fair?poor; single story; congregate 01? senior housing/demo brick e. Exis .ng Site Plan (see Map 8) This map focuses on the core campus (Areas A, C) where all existing buildings and utilities are locatedPrimary Structures does not Include mmor sheds, garages, pump house, etc.; Borler House become maintenance garage. 12 LE6END Di?.me Man-macaw!) i ME a! LESS TDQEWTG 5M1: d' MADE. Kma?i Receiveg?__? aI?L?m__u and "corded In Plan bank Mtnl' Pug. Regular mm mm mum-a: maran smarw. mumvuszmz) mezzmt) uem'm IVILEQV mama, 4555 I MATT Imam; I LLAY I2 5mm. I TIM: WARNER TIME WARNER Nazn?IEA-al mam TRUETEE I "542m I mas/Ia 7' Wm 7? EPIC) I ?1 Wazwu ??f499/939 - 1w PM I IK PALMER KILENE camp 9075' 75?: I I I5 3? SEER \IrFENCE R595 6% w? I wI? r0 mamaamaze LLC 32%! I Iowa/141 STATE OF MAINE THIN 450/569 Mam ?9/205 oat/m (50/95 - ET PM.) LMTEP (WT TO WATER WT A EMT) (um?me.) I I 91:I[fl . i IR 3 IRWS IN ?1 -J ETQNE (50/54) J/m Bf (5 I WW MIMI I eang m, mm mgPLEA REE mun. 5 {106? DRIVE momma) I Im/Ab I Iona/141 labia/7.47 NOTES: I.) mam/em: DEW 1.) WME MTIVITEQ. MWHM: WAMM a. 51 WFEET mm ENGINEERING COMPANY - Land Surveyors Civil Engineers Planners 17 Hanan Strut Fanninqdalo. Helm 04344-1613 (207)552?7752 fax (207)532?1511: Ihay-mng.com PLAN 01: WARY SLRVEY STATE OF MAINE STREET MEANT HWLL 6c WTA. MAINE Date: JLY 14. 105 jDrawn by IChkd. by: Scale: lad IDrawing M9 $49 LAURIE ROWE CHRIS PALMER xx l4 FARWEU. 7 7 I) 816% IL?..er bULwNe 9 3 r? ?Eva _l 1 Q, ADMINISTRAT c, LARGE ROGK WITH "0006 STEVENS OOMMOMS MASTER PLAN SITE PLAN DRAWN by; mu DATE: a?z?r? SOALE: REV. REV. DATE: REV. REASON NIP-8 E. Site Analysis a. Site Characteristics Adjacent Roads and Land Uses The ?Opportunities and Constraints? map (See Map, and the ?Adjacent Roads Land Uses? map (See Map, address this subject with map annotations and narrative. Suffice to say, the surrounding neighborhoods, land uses, and roads are compatible with Stevens Commons Master Plan. Especially noteworthy is the connections between the primary new road system and adjacent subdivisions and Winthrop Street, by way of the Overlook neighborhood. Stevens Commons is within Hallowell?s designated ?Urban Area.? The site is surrounded by a mix of land uses all of which (with the exception of the elementary school and the RSUZ property) are also to be incorporated in the proposed development. The principal uses, both on-and off?site, are: 0 neighborhood residential; - open space; and planned commercial. The ?Adjacent Roads Land Uses? map (See Map, illustrates the extent to which the site is surrounded by compatible residential neighborhoods. In other words, the proposed new uses will fit comfortably into Hallowell?s special character and will complement adjacent uses. It is anticipated that Stevens Commons will, however, offer a greater mix of residential uses. The same map shows the extent of open space adjacent to and within Stevens Commons. The most significant open space that adjoins the site is the l64-acre Howard Hill forested conservation area; it is to be owned by the City of Augusta and kept as open space in perpetuity. Existing hiking trails on Howard Hill are to be improved and expanded to connect to Stevens Commons, Ganneston Drive, and Sewall Street near the State house. Other nearby open space is on the RSU2 property, Vaughan Field, and the elementary school. Permanent open space on Stevens Commons extends the Howard Hill conserved land south, into woods and field. Map shows additional on?site conserved land around the pond, at two central ?commons? and around the eastern subdivision (Pleasant Street, Area E). Commercial and some residential (and/or institutional) uses are planned for within Stevens Commons core historic district. 13 Site Topography The accompanying ?Site Survey? and ?Existing Site Plan? maps MP-8) show that slope conditions vary throughout the property. The historic campus is relatively ?at; the Stevens Field area has adequate, developable slopes, as does the wooded area north of the campus where a subdivision is proposed. To the east of the campus, however, is an excessively steep slope that divides the property. It is inappropriate for development. Yet between it and Pleasant Street the slope is less severe and can be developed. Soils The National Cooperative Soil Survey map for Stevens School and its immt ?iate surrounds is shown on the following page (See Map, The entire core campus (Areas A, C) is a Hollis fine sa1 10' moi. of the slopes are in the 3 to 15% range although the east, wooded, part of the re has steeper slopes. The northern part of the property, the woods, and the 1? o- ~ield is roughly equal parts Paxton?Charlton, Woodbridge, Ridgebury, and Hollis; ll an "'ne sandy loams with slopes in the 3 to 15% range that drain well. Area is predominantly a Suffield silt loan", _;ope re range from 8 to 25%. All of these soils are well drained and or am rereseeable problems. They support a hayfield, a healthy mature hardwood it nd extensive mowed lawns on the campus itself. Tree Inventory ar ?ite "cg! ration The ?Tree Inventory? .p (See Map, I) shows all large, plus 2 foot diameter?at? breast-height (dbh) trees ?thin the built?up area of the site. Clusters of large trees (groves of pine and 0a)" .- include plus 2 foot trees are also shown on the map. Large (pl' for on) trees in the existing wooded areas (almost half the site) have not beFm rec rd ,d 3 individual trees. However, the ?Tree Inventory? map and the color aerial notoorap. .ne entire property (See Maps MP?ll 12) show these extensive Jed 'eas and vegetation, including the large hay field adjacent to Howard Hill. The mapped, individual trees are primarily hardwoods (ash, oak, and maple). A few are dying or are diseased and will be removed. The WinthrOp Street property line is edged with a buffer planting of healthy crimson maples; they will be retained. The few large single conifers and pine) are not good specimens and may be removed for road construction purposes or for safety reasons. 14 The line of mature, large ash trees on Beech Street, along the east side of the common, are a feature and will set the theme for new tree planting around the common. Preliminary analysis, based on information on file at the State?s Natural Areas Program, indicates that there are no known rare or threatened plant species on site (see Part 3). The overall, existing, site vegetation can best be seen on Map Aerial Photograph of Site. Site Watersheds The Stevens School property falls into two small watersheds. They both or. ?inatc the top of Howard Hill to the north. One drains to the west, the other to the e" The _.-vid .1g line is essentially Hallowell?s ridge roughly defined by High Street ?05 .d the easterly edge of Stevens field (See Map, The easterly watershed is devoid of water courses; shei ?ow cterizes this land and the contours run roughly north/south parallel to the Kennebe- ?iver. "l he north/south band of woods east of the campus provides an effective filter rum. The westerly watershed includes the Stevens fiel at .1 djacent wooded areas. The small pond at the base of the field drains south and ?'est 1? .1mately join Vaughan Stream and then enter the Kennebec River. Given Stevens School location near th t0} the Hallowell ridge, little run-off is generated. No erosion problems are foreseen. Traf?c Analysis Two traffic analyses taken to assess traffic impacts in Phase 1A and at build?out of the entire property. The Phase 1A raf'ic :tudy looked at ?trip generation? the number of vehicles entering and leavinc the ?3 nto Winthrop Street), accident reports, and safety safe sight distance for vr hicles, principally when exiting the site). These analyses are based on full ,cupancd in? use of Area A, the historic campus. A copy of both analyses is in Part 3. The ana? I sis shows the number of trips generated at this phase with 5 buildings fully in use) uueS not trigger the need for a Traffic Movement Permit from MaineDOT. The peak hour trips do not exceed the IOO?trip threshold. The safety analysis for Phase 1A is based on an assessment of intersections and accidents near the site. Given that there are no high crash locations in the vicinity no additional review of safety is necessary. 15 The ?Sight Distance Review? indicates that the Beech Street intersection with Winthrop Street presents no sight distance issues. Coos Lane, as presently configured, requires some adjustment to conform with MaineDOT standards. It will be moved uphill, west, to meet the standard. The Stevens Street entry is to remain as an access to the parking associated with the Stevens building and will not be a principal street. The second traffic analysis, that looked at the traffic impacts for the entire site .1 eventually built-out, took a conservative approach. In other words, it assumed hig 6. tri generation by some of the possible future commercial uses while taking all or see residential trip generation into account. Under these circumstances the pea. hour . 'os exceed 200. Hence, a full Traffic Study will be required once Phase 1 be 1. Ject 5 completed. b. Site Opportunities and Constraints the opportunities and constraints of the site a bubble diagram or annotated format.? Ordinance Language) The ?Opportunities and Constraints? map (See l\ 1p r?IR?l4) identifies areas, buildings, roads, and natural features on the existing St? 311s ,01 site and indicates how each can inform and help shape the Master Pla: 01 ?onstraint? turns out to be an ?opportunity? when interpreted creative,? Give . the extent to which the site already has extensive (and historically significant ?pment there are many opportunities to turn ?lemons? into lemonade. The four existing conditi ?us 1 at in arm? the Master Plan to the greatest extent are: 0 the historic ,ripu 0 outstanding n. .1 1-- res; wooded areas W1. moderate slope conditions; and 0 adjacent '1 uses and infrastructure. The Hist. ?c f? .np'us ristor?? err ,nts that offer opportunities include: Ell .t Opportunity National Historic Register status Revitalize the campus; honor the history Buildings in good condition Restore and re?use A fine central common Retain and embellish An intact infrastructure Utilize and improve to modern standards A mature landscape Retain all healthy large trees Good access to Winthrop Street Use, but improve safety 16 Outstanding Natural Features These features add to the natural/environmental quality of the site. Under the Master Plan, these features are made part of the open space plan. They include: Element Opportunity Excessively steep slopes between the Keep as wooded, accessible, open space campus and Pleasant Street The oak grove Create as part of a park?like commc The pond and immediate surrounds Protect as natural area and part op sn 3e system The large, open, hay field Conserve for open space and a ten? of the Howard Hill conservatir La Wooded Areas with Moderate Slopes There are three such areas on the property; two are adjat ?It to exn ng neighborhoods and one adjoins the campus and existing buildings. Element Op ?1 _1n1.J Area C, north of the oak grove To1 ,rar is suitable for residential lots Area D, east of the Overlook project ard 1 or igraphy is suitable for residential west of the field I suodivision lots Area E, below steep slopes, west of Topography is suitable for residential Pleasant Street, north of subdivision lots Adjacent Land 45 . no astructure The ?Locational Assets "nap (See Map, together with the narrative under Part 2-E?a ?Site Characteristics? dest be the land uses adjacent to the Stevens site. These uses, and the street syste ,1 t; it serves them, can also be seen on the aerial photograph (See Map, MP- 12). a] to mo :tunities and Constraints Map (see Map 14) 17 RESIDENTIAIJ NEIGHBORHOG RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD OAKWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL CARRIAGE LANE BUSINESS PARK RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBOV ., DD PROPOSED RESIDENTAIL PROPOSED RESIDENTAIL RESIDENTIAL EXISTING ROADS PRIVATE ROADS OPEN SPACE OONQERVED PROPOSED POTENTIAL ROAD HALLOWELL OVERLOOK RESIDENTIAL I NEIGHBORHOOD PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD GANNESTON PARK RESIDENTIAL EIGHBORHOOD RE NEIGHBORHOOD VAUGHN MIDDLE ST. FIELD RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD NEIGHBORHOOD HALLOWELL RIDG ES SIDENTIAL AREA HOWARD HILL CONSERVATION 6TEVEN6 GOMMONS MASTER PLAN DRAW W: 5?1?15 [56.01.13 raspy Soii Map?Kennebec County, Maine 3 5? (Stevens School44? 17' 22' 44? 17' 22" 435000 436100 436200 435300 436400 435500 436600 436700 3 u- hn I.zoo 300"? Feet 0 250 500 1000 1500 "wwg'?'mr' Mapprojec?oanebMamtor Comerma'dhates:WGSS4 Edgetis:UTMZme19NWC?84 2? all try I. USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Surve 8/29/2016 a y- Conservation Service Natlonal Cooperative Soul Survey mu. m. um? Page 1 of 3 . +1 FT. DIAMETER HARDWOOD 5TEVEN6 GOMMONS MASTER PLAN +1 FF. DIAMETER TREE INVENTORY +2 FT. DIAMETER TREE IN POOR OONDITION DRAWN lama: . HARDWOOD TREE MP5 1 1 STEVENS GOMMONS MASTER HAN AERIAL SITE PHOTO DRAWN DY: DATE: b?l?l? 5- ine GEE) andiN ona H, 3 3'1: h? . ?ja?rg DRAWN DY: Mm 9-2?15 SITE WATERSHEDE 3 ISJ Nam STEVENS MASTER .. WKEEPEMTM mmronemm?g?l i? 0 -c mm mm?: mm; or am a: RETMN To 0 m9 REF warm nae ,9 0 mean: was ro 0 women m. aerpLE ?5mg mm I FROEW . 1 I EEWIRY a I WW -- WW. I 66?; RETAIN PART or rm. 5Y5TEM A5 OPEN RWY DY 0 EXISTINE or Roms Pm me our; RBAWE aw RE-memaa mama?: mas - mum-u- UsewosmEAspAeEI-m I'm 6M5 I: sN-EmoATms?vmnY I 1?0th r' I lu- ORETAmrremsrm I: TREAVENEW 1 \tz/ WW5T.A5A . I VISUAL urn-ER . ?ing? Omarme TTEPEWDEVEMT Mfumst "Eh- x3013wa MIN WATER p.51-ka a. WOODED STRP. RETAN .6 man PMENTILEVEMF ?0 REA MODERATE mums WWI6.RETNNA5 OPPORTUNITY 00N6TRAINT5 T0 DEVELOPMENT NOTE: Aw We Now no It? THE MASTER PLAN GTEVENS 00MMON6 MASTER PLAN 8: WSTRANTS PLAN DRAWN bY: DATE: 9-1-16 W: V's-100' REV. REV. DATE: REV. REAEGN Sl'EErf MP4 4 F. Conceptual Master Plan a. Master Plan Description The new development will offer many new residential options as well as office, restaurant, retail, and other compatible uses. First off, in the historic campus (Area A), will be the immediate reuse and renovation in the Baker Building (See Map, This will consist of 3 to 5 office units on the ,tory and affordable residential apartments on the second and third stories. Betweer 6 a 9 I .1e? and two-bedroom apartments are planned. The Baker building is one of the nos "ecently occupied buildings and has seen some modern upgrades; however, due to th buil 1i gs age and defunct systems, substantial investment is needed to bring it back in i we tenants have already been secured. The next building to be revitalized and reused will be the Cenn duilding. This building contains $25,000 square feet of useable space and, altht ?qh it is 1. weed of some upgrades, it remains in the best condition of all of the buildings or 1nus. With soaring ceilings and large windows that peer down over the common and ti Ker ?bec River this building has a very appealing layout. Current options, with two ., ?ra. ,Velopers, include market rate condos and/or affordable housing units for the 51 o? is ge group. This building can house between 15 and 20 one? and two?bedrooms its. The Administration Building will confin. to am as office use for now, since the State of Maine is currently leasing that buildinL The Stevens Building is one 0' ?hubs of the campus. This building could house some light retail, a restauranf ?inc .iat and other amenities to serve the people in the community. Additir .011 u' .s are Wing explored. Due to its poor conditioi. ?he Erskine Building will need extensive renovation, as it could accommodate a ?iety of uses, including use by the community. If it were demolished, the footprint in th. 3' ,a hat could house a new building. Such a structure would be designed to compleme" the i? .ric character of the existing buildings and will have a mass and height similar w' at ?t replaces. .u all Building is a stand-alone structure on the campus at the intersection of Street and Coos Lane, and is of no architectural significance to the campus. It is not Wll?ln the designated historic district. The building is in very poor condition and is suited for demolition. However, the location of this structure will play an important role of providing an area for a ?service? type building. This lot may house a small convenience store or pharmacy or small gas station. Any of these uses would be a beneficial amenity to those in the community; there are no gas stations or pharmacies located in Hallowell. Further, there may be space on this parcel for a municipal use, if needed by the City. 18 Just north of the historic area on campus (in Area B) are two 1960s vintage single?story buildings that will be very well suited for both senior and or congregate living for those living with disabilities. A third such building in Area may be demolished because of its condition and distance from the aforementioned buildings. There is a need for these types of accommodations in this area. Although Granite Hill Estates is just up the road and offers very attractive senior living facilities it is unaffordable to most in the area because of the broad range of assisted care living and the costs associated with these services. Therefore, senior independent living with care and ?light assisted living? is being planned. Each building may have an on campus resident assistant to check in on the tenants or take them to appointment. These buildings are also equipped with ground level handicap access. Each building could house between 6 and 9 units. The Conceptual Master Plan shows there is room for at least 2 more such structures in that vicinity. Behind the existing single story buildings (in Area B), atop a small knoll, is Area where Phase 1 single family and duplex residential (Clustered Open Space Development) is proposed. This would provide 10 to 11 new single family residential house lots and up to 14 new duplex residential units. Hallowell?s Clustered Development standards, as part of an open space subdivision, would apply. This would allow for tighter density and leave more space for conservation land. This type of residential development requires public sewer and water infrastructure to work. The successful single family residential subdivision (Hallowell Overlook) on abutting property, developed by the Stevens Commons owner, shows there is a significant market for this medium density, single family and duplex home development. The Phase 2 single family residential area would be in Area D. It would also be clustered open space development that would be linked through to the Hallowell Overlook neighborhood. By creating this neighborhood connectivity one of the existing lots in the Overlook neighborhood will be eliminated or altered to accommodate this future road connection. However, there would be a huge gain to the residents of both neighborhoods. Overlook residents would gain better access to the Howard Hill trails and connectivity to services provided at Stevens Commons. At the same time the road connection will provide an alternative route to Winthrop Street. The new Phase 1 (Area C) and Phase 2 (Area D) residential neighborhoods will focus on providing small efficient houses, on smaller lots, that are more affordable housing options to that of the Overlook neighborhood. The design of homes here will have a New England architectural theme. Both of these areas will be linked to a large conservation area that provides public access trails to Howard Hill and safe walking access to the nearby elementary school. Phase 3 of the residential area is located near the intersection of Page and Pleasant Streets (Area E). Although the layout of this area is very conceptual at this point the intent is to provide single family residential lots that complement the scale and design of houses located on Page and Pleasant Streets. A large portion of this area will be preserved as natural wooded buffer and may be used to control stormwater. Because there is a very steep slope that divides this area from the rest of the campus no interconnecting road or infrastructure network, directly tied in to the campus, is planned. 19 b. Development Areas and Land Uses Stevens Commons Master Plan comprises five distinct but inter-related development areas labeled A through on map and individual parcels shown on map Within these areas, and surrounding some, is generous open space comprising two public commons, woods, and a large field. The table below describes proposed land uses within each of the development areas. The areas themselves are distinct because of their location, existing building features, topography, and the need to phase development over time. Development Area Descriptions Area A This is the core of the old Stevens School and its historic buildings; it is adjacent to Winthrop Street; and the buildings surround common open space. All new development here will respect the historic architecture. Proposed uses may include: offices, residential condominiums, institutional/education, recreation, maintenance groups, hotel, retail, restaurant, services, and open space/common. Area North of Area A are two existing, modern single?story buildings, a parking area, and a fine stand of oak trees. Proposed uses may include: congregate living, senior housing, assisted living housing, and open space/common. Area North of Area is a wooded area with modest slopes and a smaller existing single?story building in poor condition. The Plan extends the existing Beech Street north and west to serve the following proposed uses: clustered medium density single-family homes, duplexes, and townhouses. Area This area lies to the north and west of the old campus. It is primarily a wooded area, adjacent to the Hallowell Overlook subdivision, next to an existing pond and large field. Proposed use is: clustered medium density single?family homes in a residential subdivision. Area This area is separated from areas A through by very steep slopes and a broad band of woods. Access is from Pleasant and Page Streets. An easement and old pipeline may place some restrictions on development. The proposed use is: clustered medium density single?family homes in a residential subdivision. c. Access and Road System ?The Plan should include the proposed primary road network within the development including access into and out of the Ordinance Language) Fortunately, the existing Stevens campus has good access to Winthrop Street and a road system that serves all the existing buildings. The Stevens Commons Master Plan improves 20 and extends this system while eliminating unnecessary and poorly laid out sections of existing road (See Map, Upon build-out of four of the development areas A, B, on Map, the project will be connected to Winthrop Street in three primary locations at Beech and Coos Lane, at the campus, and by way of Overlook Drive, north of Coos Lane, also off Winthrop Street. The latter connection will occur in Phase 2 (See Map, Stevens Street will remain open, but just for access to Stevens School parking. Area is not connected to the core campus area (because of very steep s10pe conditions) but has access where Page and Pleasant Streets meet. The Commons internal road system is designed to efficiently provide vehicular access to all buildings and parking areas. The system design within the core area (development areas A, C) meshes with the existing roads (and utilities). New construction, to extend the existing road footprint, is planned for Area to serve residential subdivisions there and beyond. Under this Master Plan these roads and the essential underground utilities will be built to City standards with City bond funds. The subdivision roads in Areas and will be designed in Phase 2 and 3. The Master Plan simply shows where access to these areas is planned. At present the final route for the road from the core campus to Area is yet to be decided. Two alternative routes are shown on map All privately built roads will be constructed to City standards and will become dedicated City streets upon completion. (1. Sidewalks, Trails, and Open Space ?The Plan must also address an interconnected open space network and pedestrian and bicycle facilities and movement within the development and for connections to adjacent residential neighborhoods.? Ordinance Language) The Master Plan trails and sidewalks together establish an interconnected system that allows pedestrian access to all development areas and open space areas. In addition they tie into the City streets and sidewalks, to the south and east of the project area, and, on the north, to existing trails in the Howard Hill conservation parcel. Bicycle travel routes are on the proposed roads; there are no known designated bicycle routes on the adjacent City streets and it is anticipated that off?road biking on Howard Hill will not be permitted. Biking will be encouraged on the trails that link to the elementary school along Cable Road. 21 The ?Sidewalks, Trails, and Open Space? map (See Map, shows the overall pedestrian system. The trails are primarily located in the open space areas (the woods and ?eld) and link to the elementary school, Howard Hill, and the Pleasant/Page Street area. The sidewalks follow the principal roads (Beech Street, Coos Lane, and the interconnecting, east/west, road) and are one side only. No sidewalks are planned for Areas and E. The Master Plan has about 22 acres of dedicated open space (out of 54 acres) comprising woodland, a large mowed field, a small pond, and two commons a formal one in Area A and a park-like one central to Area B. As mentioned, these interconnect by way of sidewalks and trails. e. Lighting and Landscaping Street lighting will be decorative lights that acknowledge the historic character of Stevens Commons. They are planned to be feet tall and located alongside the sidewalks at 100 foot to ISO-foot intervals; electric service will be buried. The overall landscape plan is best shown on the ?Illustrative Site Plan? (See Map, Although conceptual in nature there are four essential components that together establish a consistent design approach. First, all substantial healthy, existing, stand-alone trees will be retained. Diseased or dangerous trees will be or have been removed. Second, an ?avenue? theme along the principal roads is proposed. These will feature trees of one species, for consistency. Third, to emphasize, embellish and provide enclosure, planting at the ?common? areas will be similar to that shown in the ?Illustrative Site Plan? drawing. Fourth, two existing groves of trees are to be retained. One is a small grove of about 10 pines west of the Administration building; the other is a grove of magnificent oaks (all well over 24? dbh) in the Area open space area. As Map 7 indicates, the existing buffer of trees along Winthrop Street will remain as will all trees in wooded boundary areas. The wooded areas west of Area (and east of Beech Street) and woods within the conserved areas are to remain. Finally, as indicated in the drawing, a grassed verge between the curb and adjacent sidewalk is proposed. This narrow space allows for street tree planting and street light standards; it also provides aesthetic and safety benefits. f. Site Utilities The existing road network and on?site utilities are in fair to poor condition. The Hallowell Water District reports that the current water mains are very old and are in poor condition; the system was built incorrectly from the beginning and has seen a series of ?band aid? fixes. In addition the pipes to the existing hydrants do not provide adequate water for fire 22 suppression to meet NFPA standards. CCTV sewer pipe inSpection has found that some of the sewer system is in good working order with newer upgrades; however, some of the system will need to be replaced or upsized. The primary electrical service that feeds the campus is not up to CMP standards and will need to be rebuilt to meet these standards in order to individualize the buildings and continue reuse of some of the buildings. Gas service, from Summit gas, is to be provided. Fiber?optic cable exists on the campus and will continue to be utilized to provide high powered internet speeds that will be very desirable to larger tech based companies. Some of the existing paved roads need to be widened and resurfaced; new sidewalks to provide safe pedestrian travel are planned. New decorative street lights to illuminate the travel ways will add to the aesthetics and charm of the entire campus. All of the proposed utility services are shown on Map g. Master Plan Development Parcels Development Parcels3 (See Map, MP- 15) Lot Acres Parking Uses Ownership3 (approx) (estimate) I 1 Farwell 0.70 12 service/retail/ gas station owner or other 2 Stevens 1.13 55 multi?use others 3 Administration 0.61 13 offices/ administration owner 4 Baker 1.89 35 offices owner 5 Central 1.0 32 residential/educational other 6 Erskine 0.55 18 multi?use other (or owner) 7 Area 2.47 42 senior housing other (or owner) 8 Area 0.63 13 senior housing other (or owner) 9 Area 1.95 single-family housing owner 10 Area 0.67 duplex housing owner or others 11 Area 1.31 duplex housing owner or others 3 Will depend on marketing and sales. 23 h. A Public/Private Partnership One of the major development challenges on?site (and in the Kennebec County market area) is the build-out costs relative to the sale/rental prices that the local market can support. Given the overall scale of the project and the enormous private costs associated with building renovation, the project?s success hinges on the City of Hallowell?s willingness to participate in funding. This involves private and public risk. But, with risks come rewards. The rewards include: reusing a magnificent underutilized property; revitalizing six or seven vacant buildings; contributing to smart population growth; and adding to tax base growth (which has been non?existent for the past 100 years, being exempt in State ownership). i. Development Phasing, Marketing, and Financing Under the Master Plan the overall campus will be divided into separate lots that serve different uses, while preserving the classic campus and quad that make this property so attractive. Each lot will have associated parking areas and will be served by upgraded public utilities and roads/sidewalks that interconnect with surrounding neighborhoods and conservation land. This is the best approach to the whole property redevelopment because it allows for Specialists, in certain development realms, to take on smaller pieces of the project and will hopefully lead to a quicker overall redevelopment as opposed to one team trying to do it all. One group may focus on assisted senior housing while another developer may focus on office space or artist live/work spaces and another may focus on affordable single family or duplex residential housing. Providing this mix of uses will also attract a variety of age groups and help develop a true sense of community, from young to old. A variety of financing tools will be utilized to make different parts of the development feasible. These include: Brownfield Funds for lead paint and asbestos abatement purposes; low income tax credits; and federal and state historic tax credits to make the numbers work for the building renovations. It is fortunate that five of the buildings on campus have already been placed on the National Historic Register; this makes them eligible for federal and state historic tax credits and the designation represents a competitive advantage. j. Conceptual Master Plan Maps Maps 19 and 20 combine the information provided in the aforementioned maps and narrative. For ease of understanding, two maps are shown. The first covers the entire 54? acre site; the second covers the core campus area. 24 RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS OPEN SPACE PHASE 2 I - A MIXED USES MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL HISTORIC RESIDENTAIL SUBDIVISIONS CAMPUS a 1 PHASE 1 PHASE 1 3 :1 OPEN SPACE - RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS 5: PHASE 3 . . . . - STEVENS GOMMONS MASTER PLAN LAND USE MAP DRAWN DY: IDATE: em_E: raw MPEZ LOT 10 DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL 0.67AC :3 DR. OFFICES RETAIL, ARTISIT 1.13 AC HOUSING ASSISTED LOT 9 LIVING PRESERVED CLUSTE 7 2.47 AC OAK GROVE . RES. .4 PRESERVED 0.69 Ac 1.95 AIE OPEN QUAD 0.SCHOOL SENIORIVET. :3 OFF ICEIRES. 1.89 AC RES.CONDOS ASSISTED LIVING DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL LOT 1.00 AC AC 1.3] AC POSSIBLE CONSERVATION I AREA 6TEVEN5 COMMONS MASTER PLAN we 3. LAND UsEs I00 50 a I00 200 FEET DRAWN bY: IDATE: 5?2?15 raw 9m 5 PROPOGED 0er 6TREET5 a? ATERNATE PRIVATE PRIVATELY EJUILT smears EXISTING CITY STREETS I I A STEVENG GOMMONE MAQTER HAN PLEASANT STREET MOE55 ROAD 5Y5TEM5 DRAWN bY: MW IDATE: a-z-I; lame: law .LEIEIHLS 1 6 LINS DETWEEN 5am BETTE-E 5ERVE5 A5 SAT WOWARD HU. TRAILS VIA M6555 RWTE mus FROM 51wst comma 0 I I I I 0 RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION I am: SIDEWALKS NJ. I TIE TRAL SYSTEM 3 OPEN 5: STREET 3 SPACE STEVENSOW 000900000000006TREET T0 RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION wn'II - WW HLL TRAIL SYSIEM 8: I64 MRE AREA TRAIL6 a a. RAIL TRAL RESIDENTIAL 0 ,5 SUBDIVISION I 0 II. 5 0? WITH 1' I 00 5TEVEN6 GOMMON5 MA5TER PLAN .I TRAILS 3: OPEN GPAGE MAP . . . u_ um; To DRAWN DY. 9?2 [em 5, [-54 5: STREETS 1 7 FARWEUPoselbl? - . . DAKER awe. - stINe woo Images. - . 4 . 4 mace-s APARTMENTS NEW RI5ER POLE. REMOVE EXISTINQ OH. ff ELEO. FROM HERE ON 6WITGH TO TE PRIMARY LPGRADE EXIETINQ 5EO0NPARY FOR PRIMARY ELEO. 6TREET LEGEND XI mm. m: Pm mm UTLETY mu: n: mm u? uruerzw: MWWESLAYM.UI1WESMIEMTIN 9? mm 59er mm 3 mus smut sumo: . ?Tan MN GWGEPTUAL PLAN DRAWN bY: MW DATE: 5?7-46 50%: l"=50? arm?: REV. REV. DATE: REV. REASON mam wmm. 5r? 1-3? t} WMLW gnaw? mm a? VILVE (EE ME 1) 1 8 I ELEMENTARY TIME TIME HALLOWELL TIME SCHOOL WARN ER WARNER I OVERLOOK WARNER I - - II LOT #14 non? Lona I I I I I . ACRES ACRES 1.63 ACRES gamma, CABLE m? ?57 - 46' mm ?0 SCHOOL ?1 0Q - aw a WRNER 1 I I 1/ A i HOWARD HILL I PRESERVE I I 1 +/-164 ACRES r1--r1 r1--.4.-. ml I HALLOWELL I Wmln'l'm? RIDGES . .j ?a nullmun 1.11m 4' - WOODEP GONSERVAHON AREAS 1? . . RR0P06ED AREAS 3 mutant .. . NEW 6TRU6TURE6 I I - . ?sh. 2 a . PROPOSED NEW LOT LINE6 o. :l A PROPOSED ROAD RIEHT OF WAY . OOMMOMS PLAN 0 Wm WET I I PLAN I I A DRAWN bY: MKM DATE: 9-1-I6 66sz rem .6 I 2% ?um, REV. REV. DATE: REV. REASON I my. 1 MT BE USED I?m WTW. I I Mill connoc?vlty. 9 ?ll-II i TAIL 60W. 4. 12? I . ?7 06?" LAURIE ROWE l CHRIS PALMER LOT 10 I I POSSIBLE DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL . If, 1?1 \\5r 7 a 4 -- v, 7,000 6F ?1:51 LOT7 i VET. w,nn. OFFICES, HOTEL CLUSTE i . - . . . SINGLE FAM.RESIDENTIAL . KL ?ll_n . ,z a 5 a CWRES. . . Lorn" DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL PHASE 1 1.31 AC a; . Pa??ibLE WOODED AREAS PROPOSED NEW LOT LINE6 . 6TEVEN6 OWMOMS MAETER PLAN .05 a, a we E, PROPOSED ROAD OF WAY M5 mm PROPOSED mm A TEE PLAN A DRAWN bY: MW DATE: 3?2?l6 50mgPOeelbLE NEW Gluing - mmamml, commorclal, cultural, Institutional, nunthan 1nd func?ona?y Inbound Mm. provldno podoslrlan connectivity. im- . New Forwell Building New Senior Housing New Trail C005 Lane Cleveland Building Duplex H59. Winil'lroF Si. Sleuens Build in? Common 3 Common dminisl'ra live unldm? each freel- casing Open Space. baker Building Cenlml Building Trail l'o . Maml?enance Bldg. I '5l?l?eel-g Erskin? Building i i i Flagg~Dummer Building Regidm?d/ ?'Residen?al Duplex la New Senior Housing C0 men: a . CDSen'o /Acla live. H5 . 5. Fainll Illuslrahve Sile Plan 3 5 G. Master Plan Development Standards Under the provisions of Hallowell?s Stevens School Planned Development District the Master Plan narrative must contain development standards that the Planning Board will use when reviewing Site Plans or Subdivisions proposed for specific development parcels within the Master Plan. The states: . .a Planned Mixed- Use Development mast demonstrate that it is consistent with ne approved Master Plan and its development standards. (Page 325) Further, it states: ?The to allow the owner/developer of the propert? at, . xii/titty in the use of the former Stevens School complex as long as the dew 1pm: wt teet the City ?s objectives for the reuse of the complex as articulated in the Me Plan approval criteria set forth in this section.? (Page 325) Other pertinent language that helps clarify the equ1. development standards that 1 apply to buildings or areas in the development inc" ?The standards in a coordinr" i v. j-integrated district. These standards must address, at a minimar par voat and design, landscaping, exterior lighting, signage, pedestrian and bicycle "'lcilitir and architectural design, and the preservation of the character of the ex 'tin,5 Vational Register historic district.? (Page 329) The identifies 18 spec at ?reas to be addressed. It states that the standards may reference ?the existing pl '1 ev, standards where appropriate or establish modified or new standards. Under this Master Plan . oroach the City?s Site Plan Review language (Chapter A) shall apply to a]I development parcels except single?family subdivision parcels and dimensional I't tui' trents for existing structures and pertinent additions thereto, to meet accessibilit" or ?e .otection requirements. Duplex residential development will be reviewer as Site Plan application as will all mixed?use, commercial, or congregate i using. Further. such applications shall be viewed as minor development because they are part of the approved Master Plan and are required to conform with that plan. In addition, where the Site Plan Review language applies, development projects under this Master Plan shall not be subject to the ?Additional Standards? of the ordinance; only the ?Basic Standard,? if applicable, shall govern unless a waiver is requested and granted. However, the specific additional standards under this Master Plan, and described here in Part shall apply. 25 The purpose of the above provisions is to allow ?exibility while assuring conformance with the Master Plan, rather than the more general, less applicable, language of the City?s Code of Ordinances, Site Plan Review section. Site Plan Review applicants may also apply for waivers from provisions already addressed in the Master Plan and the Board shall give such requests due consideration. The applicant also reserves the right to petition the Planning Board to alter a standard should there be good cause and the essential Master Plan concept and neighboring properties are not compromised by such a change. The following narrative addresses each of the 18 areas one-by-one. (1) The location of buildings on lots and the relationship of buildings to the street These dimensional standards shall apply to single-family residential subdivisions within the Master Plan: maximum residential density: 10 dwelling units/acre; minimum lot size: 5000 sq. ft.; minimum street front building setback from lot line: 20 ft.; minimum side building setback from lot line: 7.5 ft.; minimum back building setback from lot line: 30 ft.; minimum lot width: 50 ft.; minimum lot width on cul-de?sac to average 60 ft. with a minimum of a 25-ft. front lot line. In projects subject to Site Plan Review those building location criteria shall apply. (2) The location of parking vis-a-vis the building and the street Section 9?629 of the Code addresses parking standards in Master Plan developments. In essence, provision is made for exempting the parking standard therein, provided measures are taken to show the demand for parking is less or there is adequate common or shared parking. (3) The treatment of areas adjacent to streets both within the R-O?Wand also within the front setback, including landscaping and use of this area The Master Plan ?Illustrative Site Plan? addresses this conceptually and shall be used as a general guide for reviewers. It is intended that the main road network will follow the existing road network throughout the campus and that the main streets will be widened to appropriate widths to allow for safe travel and be accepted as City owned and maintained streets. However, 26 due to the proximity to some of the existing buildings, trying to maintain the Historic Campus charm and minimizing impervious surfaces to avoid excessive runoff, some roads may not be able to be widened to the full width as depicted in the City road specifications. Variances may be sought in a few instances. Within the street the Plan anticipates 4?foot?wide, hard-surfaced sidewalks; where feasible and advisable the sidewalks are to be separated from the curb with a grass verge sufficient to accommodate street lighting and street?tree planting. Where a verge next to the sidewalk is not provided light posts shall be placed to allow for ADA sidewalk accessibility. Where no sidewalk is provided within the grass, street?trees or suitable, low, landscaping shall be provided. In general, the overall pattern of principal streets lined with trees shall be followed. Lot front setbacks shall be landscaped and maintained to community standards. walls or fences shall exceed 6 feet in height and shall be of wood or stone. Walls or fences shall not be permitted in the historic district other than to screen dumpsters and/or mechanical units. (4) Provisions for vehicular movement within the site including access for service and emergency vehicles See the Site Plan Review standards. (5) Provisions for vehicle connections between adjacent lots/buildings See the Site Plan Review standards. (6) Provisions for shared/coordinated access to the internal street network See the Site Plan Review standards. (7) Provisions for pedestrians and bicycles including pedestrian areas and facilities See #3 above for sidewalk standards as well as the Site Plan Review Pedestrian Access and Sidewalks standards. In addition, pedestrian sidewalks shall be provided at least on one side of the principal public streets in Areas A, B, and C. The sidewalks shall interconnect and link to Winthrop Street and trails on the property. Bicyclists will use the street network and the two trails on the west side of the property that link to the elementary school; bicycles will not be permitted on the field or woods trails. Suitable grading on these school bicycle routes is to be provided. The field and woods trails are for hiking only and are to be maintained for such. Further a small, head?of?trail parking area is to be provided near the pond and field area, off the public street. The common in the historic district is for public pedestrian use as is the Oak Grove park in Area B. The common is to be directly accessible to pedestrians from the Winthrop Street sidewalk. 27 (8) Provision of landscaping within parking areas and around buildings See Site Plan Review standards. In addition, the landscaping concept around the ?commons,? as shown in the ?Illustrative Site Plan shall guide the placement of trees in these locations. The goal shall be to create park?like areas that provide a sense of enclosure for public enjoyment. The existing landscaped, tree, buffer along the length of Winthrop Street shall be maintained and enhanced. (9) Provisions for snow storage and management of related runo? Most parking areas on the east of the campus are existing and abut an ex? "e nuc- of woodland where excess snow can be dumped without an adverse impac from . noff. Other, new, parking lots are sited so that plowed snow can be pilerJ flat, .ND .reas where the melted snow can infiltrate the lawn. lO) Provisions for the screening/bu??ering of parking lots See Site Plan Review standards. (1 l) The location of and provisions for the screeni" OJ :e areas, overhead doors, waste disposal areas, and similar facilities See Site Plan Review standards. (12) The general treatment of outdoor 'ign. 1g including parking lots, security lighting, roadways, and pedestrian ways Throughout the proiect ar 1 Re )llowing standards shall apply: no light fittin? sna. proJ .1ght upward to light the night sky; all street light 4' ?f uniform, historic design on +lO-foot high posts, spaced 100? to ISO?feet ?art; no park'r lot or free-standing light poles shall be greater than 20 feet in height; all elec iv .1 'iring to outdoor lights shall be buried; no 411;- -e is to create intense glare conditions and/or face into a driver?s (or 1: d9 tr? eyes; nu. . lights for signage shall adhere to the Site Plan Review standards. Pnrt? Jr, the ?Exterior Lighting? standards of Section 9?616 shall apply. (13) The location, width, and treatment of bu?ers See Site Plan Review standards. 28 (14) Standards for the size of signs to be allowed including the relationship of amount of signage to size of building The sign performance standard in Section 9?637 shall apply, where applicable. All signs, not just those in the historic district, shall conform to those within the district. (15) Provisions for the coordination of signs for the entire development In addition to the standards referenced in Section 9?637, in order to present a coordinated, attractive and easy to read set of signs, the following shall apply and override those in Section 9-637: no more than two 16 sq. ft. free?standing signs per development parcel are permitted (parking, directional, safety or ingress/egress signs will be allowed in addition to this standard) such signs shall be rectangular and placed in a ?landscape,? horizontal, manner; no such signs be over 6?feet high, measured from the ground to the top of the sign; such signs should have the same information on both sides if needed for visibility for motorists traveling in each direction. (16) Standards for the design of individual buildings to create a visually-integrated development. Three sets of standards, based on the proposed land uses and existing conditions on?site shall apply. a) In the historic district (Area A): the Site Plan Review basic standards shall apply and all renovations of existing historic buildings shall respect the style, scale, materials, proportion, and color of the existing or any new structures shall substantially match the historic architectural styles in terms of scale, massing materials, facade proportions, roof line, and color. b) In Area B: the Site Plan Review basic standards shall apply and where any new building is proposed proximate to the historic district it shall replicate the materials and facade proportions of the adjacent building. 0) In Areas C, D, and where single?family and duplex housing is proposed a consistent architectural style is required. This architectural language is predominant in the nearby neighborhoods and should set the standard for new housing design. Further, the following Neighborhood Design Guidelines should be followed in the siting of single?family homes. keep lots small and orient to the street; retain modest setbacks from the street; made useable, private backyard space; 29 retain existing mature trees where feasible; avoid visually prominent driveways and garages; provide sidewalks, street trees, and pedestrian scale lighting; provide a variety of architectural designs yet retain an overall architectural theme. (17) Provisions for maintaining the historic character of the buildings and grounds within the existing Maine Industrial School for Girls Historic District. This objective has been followed and achieved in developing the Master Plan. Indeed, the Plan enhances the historic campus grounds by providing a better, more logical infrastructure design. The standards presented here will maintain the character and charm of the historic campus and deed covenant language, in any parcel sold for development by others, will incorporate maintenance provisions to uphold the quality and character of the district. The covenants will also include design criteria for new additions placed on or near the existing historic buildings. In most cases State and Federal Historic Tax credits will be sought and needed to revitalize the historic buildings. In doing so, the renovations of these buildings will be held to standards which are defined by the Secretary of the Interior?s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. (18) Provisions for providing fire protection water supplies appropriate to the types of uses that will be allowed. It is proposed that the campus will be served with new water mains throughout. With this new ?re hydrants will also be installed throughout the campus. The design of the water main system and fire hydrants was performed by AB. Hodsdon Engineers and reviewed by the Hallowell Water District. The new systems will be built to the Hallowell Water District Standards so that the water system will be accepted and maintained by the Hallowell Water District. Some of the existing buildings have internal sprinkler systems that may be utilized. The new end uses of each of the structures will determine the requirement of sprinkler systems or not. If sprinkler systems are required they will designed, tested and maintained to NFPA standards. 30 m; INSTALL APPROX. 145 L.F. OF 2" DIA. HOPE WATER A -mmr a -m SERVICE. cu. - alarm a INSTALL IAI. CAP FULLY RESTRAINED AND - I 0% RLOCX -m INSTALL 2" DIA. WATER (U 7 I SERIACE WATER SHUT A I I I I INSTALL 12x5 w. TEE THRUST OFF AND Box AT R.O.BLOCK DIA GATE a I I \5 I INSTALL APPROXBox DIA. I DIA. HOPE WATER SERVICE 2 I I II I \k GATE VALVES I DIA. WATER SHUTOFF EIOXan? mu: INSTALL APPROX. I340 L.F. 4 INSTALL ~5me DIA. CLASS r? - - INSTALL APPROX. 215 L.F. I v-T INSTALL WATER MAUI 5 DM- c-L-D-l- 52 II OF 2' DIA. HDPE WATER I 3 CAP FULLY a - Turn-II qua" I WATER AND 5 I SEWCE- I BLOCK AND THRLIST BLOCK a, I M.J. GATE VALVE 30X. ,v .. wt APPROX- ?0 f, In ?2 INSTALL IA .J. CAP FULLY u. a - nun-rum LF. or 3" DIA. 4 ,f AND OF DIA. CLASS . I, .- - ., -wnmm (1?55 52 _52 WATER ONV. ST INSTALL APPROX. 245 I L.F. 0F 5' DIA. C.L.D.I. l/ I CLASS 52 WATER MAIN. - r% I NOTE: - I CONTRACTOR SHALL I INSTALL VLJ. BENDS THRUST SLOCXS AS NEEDED FOR MAIN AND I I - SERVICE INSTALLATIONS, INSTALL DIA. TAPPING Rx. - SLEEVE AND VALVE. A. I, I -h BUILDING TO BE REMOVEDINSTALL APPROX. 65 L.F. I - I 0F 5? DIA. (i I f- I. I INSTALL 2" DIA. WATER CLASS 52 WATER NAIN. SERVICE SHUTOFF INSTALL 12:5 M.J. TEE INSTALL a DIA. N.J. THRUST BLOCK ?k I GATE VALVE RDX. AND 5" CIA. N..I. GATE VALVE w/ Box. A I I II WIRESEBIEO 4572 SF, 1' I I INSTALL APPROXPRESERVED L.F. OF DIA. C.L.O.073230350 I CLASS 52 WATER MAININSTALL APPROX 1,575 a (V I I LF. DF 12" DIA. C.L.D.I. INSTALL 12 DIA. IAPPING I I I I I INSIALL Appnux 33 CLASS 52 WATER MAIN, SLEEVE AND VALVEMIDI CLASS WATER MAIN. NI 5 5 I KSL INSTALL 4?2 DIAHALL 9.095 M. WATER SERVICE INSTALL 12? DIA. NLJ. BENDS I I I I I WITH THRUST I I, I I I WATER DIST. SPECIFICATIONS. I _leFLAGG I II- ?so\ . 1 I I DUMMER rh? I I NIOR HOUSING i I _g I I I .52 $12-16 UNITS INDIA 24,775 SF. I, I i I mum?!) cmuos LII: I NSTALL APPROX. 44 LE. 4 ENTS ?4 $4 WATER MAININSTALL 12x5 Au. TEE ?g THRUET BLOCK AND .. I 3H9: 2.. *Iw/ 30x, - .. 12x6 AI..I. TEE - BLOCK amp?w - BLOCK ST 1m TEE THRUST AND a? DIA. IILJ- GATE A ?16 DIA. LLJ. DATE VALVE . I APPROX LI, S- - DIA. M.J. GATE Li - INSTIILL - - - BOXES AND DIA. 6 DUI I .M..J. GATE VALVE H- CLASS 52 WATER a INSTALL APPROX. 350 LF. INSTALL APPROX. 50 LF. \m IOE 2' DIA. HOPE WATER OF DIA. - 42+! - CLASS 52 WATER MAIN. . . . 12x6 MU. TEE T559 AND MJ GATE VALVE DIA. w. CAI-E VALVE I 50.1 . . 80X. i . .-. ?x "Ru KINSTALL APPROX 53 LF I . INSTALL CLASS 52 WATER MAIN. 2? I ?Ella: ?me II _glj' . . I I I No. Date App IEVENS SCHOOL REVI TALIZATION LLC. MAINE SITE PLAN ?nun, Sheet No. ~32 or . '3 AEHodsdon 36Common 51:. WuturV?l, Mu. 049m (207) 373-5154 1 I. - '5 - 5 Drum By: EB Scnle: - rad?O" 6155 Checked By: Date: Approved Date: S/gjlf? 2 0f '1 File No. Pm'ect No. PART 3. MASTER PLAN SUPPORTING MATERIALS A. Consulting Team B. Site Photos C. Letters from Natural Areas Program, Kennebec Land Trust and Maine Historic Preservation D. Traf?c Report E. Utilities Reports F. Historic District 31 Acknowledgments ConsultingTeam Numerous individuals have guided us in preparing this Master Plan and in shaping the Concept Plans presented here. Their assistance, insights and comments are gratefully acknowledged. Mastway Development, LLC Matt Morrill Federle Law Tom Federle Kent Associates Brian Kent (MAUD), President Thayer Engineering Company, Inc. Elliot Thayer, P.E., PLS Maine Traf?c Resources Diane Morabito, P.E., P.T.O.E Harold Wood, P.E. Consulting Engineer A.E. Hodsdon Consulting Engineers Al Hodsdon, P.E. Hewett Whitney Engineers Colin Hewett, P.E., LEED AP C. Michael Lewis Architecture Benjamin Bailey Dylan Charlesworth UMA Architecture Graduating Students Ted Berry Company, Inc. Hallowell Water District Dennis Kinney Greater Augusta Utilities District (G.A.U.D) Brian Tarbuck, P.E., Andy Begin PE. 32 Lead Developer, Site design and Project Coordination Legal Counsel and guidance Master Planning, Landscape design Project review and consultation Site design-layout, Surveying and stormwater analysis Traffic and safety analysis Sewer analysis and design Water mains and fire hydrant design/layout Underground electrical design and street light coordination Architectural rendering Architectural renderings CCTV sewer system inspection Water main guidance Sewer mains and manhole review guidance Site Photos m. :1 u, - A unum?tah?i .5 Historic Core Campus looking out over Preserved Open Quad, back toward Winthrop Street 33 Site Photos Historic Central Building seen from Beech Street 34 Site Photos Community walk through Conservation Land to Howard Hill Trail Head Preserve 35 STATE OF MAINE DEPARTMENT OF INLAND FISHERIES WILDLIFE 284 STATE STREET 41 STATE HOUSE STATION PAUL LEPAGE AUGUSTA ME 043330041 CHANDLER WOODCOCK GOVERNCIR COBIAIISSKINEK August 30, 2016 Brian Kent Kent Planners 280 Oak Hill Road Litch?eld, ME 04350 RE: Information Request - Stevens School Property, Hallowell Dear Brian: Per your request received August 23, 2016, we have reviewed current Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) information for known locations of Endangered, Threatened, and Special Concern species; designated Essential and Signi?cant Wildlife Habitats; and ?sheries habitat concerns within the vicinity of the Stevens School Property Project in Hallowell. For purposes of this review, we are assuming that the proposed development will also include the undeveloped and/or forested portions of the project search area. Our Department has not mapped any Essential or Signi?cant Wildlife Habitats that would be directly affected by your project. Endangered, Threatened, and Special Concern Species Bats Of the eight species of bats that occur in Maine, the three Myon's species are protected under Maine?s Endangered Species Act (MESA) and are afforded special protection under 12 MRS ?12801 - ?12810. The three Myon's species include little brown bat (M. Iucjfugus, State Endangered); northern long-eared bat (M. septentrionaljs, State Endangered); and eastern small?footed bat (M. lejb?, State Threatened). The ?ve remaining bat species are listed as Special Concern: big brown bat (Eptesjcus fuscus); red bat (Lasiurus borealjs), hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus), silver?haired bat (Lasjonycterjs noctjvagans), and tri- colored bat (Perjmyon's sub?avus). While a comprehensive statewide inventory for bats has not been completed, it is likely that several of these species occur within the project area during migration and/or the breeding season. We recommend that you contact the US. Fish and Wildlife Service--Maine Fish and Wildlife Complex (Wende Mahaney, (207) 469-7300, Extension 1118) for further guidance, as the northern long?cared bat is also listed as a Threatened Species under the Federal Endangered Species Act. It is possible that some of these bat species could occupy human structures. For information on preventing con?icts with bats, we recommend following the ?Preventing Con?icts? guidelines found at infonnation/bats.html. Unless there is a threat to human PHONE: (207) 287?5202 FISH AND WILDLIFE ON THE WEB: EMAIL ADDRESS: ifw.webmaster@maine.gov Letter to Brian Kent Comments RE: Hallowell, Stevens School Property August 30, 2016 health and safety, we recommend that construction or demolition work on bat-occupied portions of a structure not occur between June 1 and August 15, when young bats are still unable to ?y and would likely die without parental care. The installation of a one-way exclusion device may be necessary to prevent re?entry of bats into the structure after July 31 (see bat exclusion recommendations in the above website link). Signi?cant Wildlife Habitat Signi?cant Vernal Pools At this time, MDIFW Signi?cant Wildlife Habitat (SWH) maps indicate no known presence of SWHs within the project area, which include Waterfowl and Wading Bird Habitats, Deer Wintering Areas, Seabird Nesting Islands, Shorebird Areas, and Signi?cant Vernal Pools. However, a comprehensive statewide inventory for Signi?cant Vernal Pools has not been completed. Therefore, we strongly recommend that surveys for vernal pools be conducted within the project boundary by quali?ed wetland scientists prior to ?nal project design to determine whether there are Signi?cant Vernal Pools present in the area. These surveys should extend up to 250 feet beyond the anticipated project footprint because of potential performance standard requirements for off-site Signi?cant Vernal Pools, assuming such pools are located on land owned or controlled by the applicant. Once surveys are completed, our Department will need to review and verify any vernal pool data prior to ?nal determination of signi?cance. Fisheries Habitat Without details, it is dif?cult to know what impacts your project may have on the mapped stream that appears to start at the pond outlet on the back portion of the property. That being said, MDIFW makes the following general recommendations as they pertain to work in and around streams. We recommend that a 100-foot undisturbed vegetated buffer be maintained along streams. Buffers should be measured from the edge of stream or associated fringe and ?oodplain wetlands. Maintaining buffers along coldwater ?sheries is critical to the protection of water temperatures, water quality, and inputs of coarse woody debris necessary to support conditions required by brook trout. Stream crossings should be avoided, but if a stream crossing is necessary, or an existing crossing needs to be modi?ed, it should be designed to provide full ?sh passage. Small streams, including intermittent streams, can provide crucial rearing habitat, cold water for thermal refugia, and abundant food for juvenile salmonids on a seasonal basis and undersized crossings may inhibit these functions. Generally, MDIFW recommends that all new, modi?ed, and replacement stream crossings be sized to span 1.2 times the bankfull width of the stream. In addition, we generally recommend that stream crossings be open bottomed natural bottom), although embedded structures which are back?lled with representative streambed material have been shown to be effective in not only providing habitat connectivity for ?sh but also for other aquatic organisms. If a stream crossing is ultimately proposed, we encourage you to contact our Region Fisheries staff (207-547-5314) for crossing design recommendations that best maintain ?sh passage. Construction Best Management Practices should be closely followed to avoid erosion, sedimentation, alteration of stream ?ow, and other impacts as eroding soils from construction activities can travel signi?cant distances as well as transport other pollutants resulting in direct impacts to ?sh and ?sheries habitat. In addition, we recommend that any necessary instream work or work within 100 feet of streams occur between July 15 and October 1. Page 2 of 3 Letter to Brian Kent Comments RE: Hallowell, Stevens School Property August 30, 2016 This consultation review has been conducted speci?cally for known MDIFW jurisdictional features and should not be interpreted as a comprehensive review for the presence of other regulated features that may occur in this area. Prior to the start of any future site disturbance we recommend additional consultation with the municipality, and other state resource agencies including the Maine Natural Areas Program and Maine Department of Environmental Protection in order to avoid unintended protected resource disturbance. Please feel free to contact my of?ce if you have any questions regarding this informationany further assistance. Best regards, Maclaine Biologist Page 3 of 3 :51. at? -. {nil-'3 . ai?n?ousfj? f_ . - 438000 elm Iwwh0319_ v/ 436000 (?ml, .. Crime?. - - ?1mgEat .2. 01f5?50 1 .-. :,Emergen .17kg.qu . - ?nv-mH. . 8 . .lsear ?dismal-h 3 '1 Miran4906000 4904000 Environmental Review of Fish and Wildlife Observations and Priority Habitats Hallowell, Stevens School Property (Version 1) Miles 0 0.125025 0.5 0.75 1 Project Name: Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife Projection: UTM, NAD83, Zone 19N Date: 8/25/2016 Roseate Tern Piping Plover/Least Tern Aquatic (2.5 mi review) (9 ProiectPoints u-u ProjectLines LURC p-fw ProjectPolys Cooperative DWAs a ProjectSearchAreas Seabird Nesting Islands - Rare Mussels (5 mi review) Shorebird Areas Maine Heritage Fish Waters Inland Waterfowl/Wading Bird Arctic Charr Habitat a Shoreland Zoning_lwwh Deer Winter Area E. Brook Trout Joint Venture Subwatershed Classification Tidal WaterfOWl/Wading Bird Redfin Pickerel/Swamp Darter Habitats (bufferlOOft) Signi?cant Vernal Pools Special Concern-occupied habitats(100ft buffer) Environmental Review Polygons Wild Lake Trout Habitats STATE OF MAINE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, CONSERVATION FORESTRY 93 STATE HOUSE STATION PAUL R. LEPAGE AUGUSTA: MAINE 04333 WALTER E. WHITCOMB GOVERNOR COMMISSIONER August 23, 2016 Brian Kent Kent Associates, Flaming Design 280 Oak Hill Road Litch?eld, ME 04350 Via email: kentplanners?lgmailcom Re: Rare and exemplary botanical features in proximity to: Stevens Commons, Mixed Use Development, Hallowell, Maine Dear Mr. Kent: I have searched the Natural Areas Program?s Biological and Conservation Data System ?les in response to your request received August 23, 2016 for information on the presence of rare or unique botanical features documented from the vicinity of the project in Hallowell, Maine. Rare and unique botanical features include the habitat of rare, threatened, or endangered plant species and unique or exemplary natural communities. Our review involves examining maps, manual and computerized records, other sources Of information such as scienti?c articles or published references, and the personal knowledge of staff or cooperating experts. Our of?cial response covers only botanical features. For authoritative information and of?cial response for zoological features you must make a similar request to the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, 284 State Street, Augusta, Maine 04333. According to the information currently in our Biological and Conservation Data System ?les, there are no rare botanical features documented speci?cally within the project area. This lack of data may indicate minimal survey efforts rather than con?rm the absence of rare botanical features. You may want to have the site inventoried by a quali?ed ?eld biologist to ensure that no undocumented rare features are inadvertently harmed. If a ?eld survey of the project area is conducted, please refer to the enclosed supplemental information regarding rare and exemplary botanical features documented to occur in the vicinity of the project site. The list may include information on features that have been known to occur historically in the area as well as recently ?eld?veri?ed information. While historic records have not been documented in several years, they may persist in the area if suitable habitat exists. The enclosed list identi?es features with potential to occur in the area, and it should be considered if you choose to conduct ?eld surveys. This ?nding is available and appropriate for preparation and review of environmental assessments, but it is not a substitute for on-site surveys. Comprehensive ?eld surveys do not exist for all natural areas in Maine, and in the absence of a Speci?c ?eld investigation, the Maine Natural Areas Program cannot provide a de?nitive statement on the presence or absence of unusual natural features at this Site. WW DEILRTMEHY OF MOLLY DOCHERTY, DIRECTOR PHONE: (207) 287-8044 MAINE NATURAL AREAS PROGRAM conservation FAX: (207) 287-8040 Fore 5t? Letter to Brian Kent Comments RE: Stevens Commons, Hallowell August 23, 2016 Page 2 of 2 The Natural Areas Program is continuously working to achieve a more comprehensive database of exemplary natural features in Maine. We would appreciate the contribution of any information obtained should you decide to do ?eld work. The Natural Areas Program welcomes coordination with individuals or organizations proposing environmental alteration, or conducting environmental assessments. If, however, data provided by the Natural Areas Program are to be published in any form, the Program should be informed at the outset and credited as the source. The Natural Areas Program has instituted a fee structure of $75.00 an hour to recover the actual cost of processing your request for information. You will receive an invoice for $150.00 for two hours of our services. Thank you for using the Natural Areas Program in the environmental review process. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have further questions about the Natural Areas Program or about rare or unique botanical features on this site. Sincerely, tog/V?. Don Cameron Ecologist Maine Natural Areas Program 207-287-8041 don.s.cameron@maine.gov Rare and Exemplary Botanical Features Within 4 miles of Project: Stevens Commons, Hallowell, Maine State State Global Date Last Occurrence Name Status Rank Rank Observed Number Habitat American Ginseng S3 G3G4 1912-07 17 Hardwood to mixed forest (forest, upland) SB G3G4 1907-07-28 18 Hardwood to mixed forest (forest, upland) Awned Flatsedge SC 82 G5 2012-09-28 11 Non-tidal rivershore (non-forested, seasonally wet) Awned Sedge Sl G5 2015-07-26 5 Coastal non?cidal wetland (non-forested, wetland) Broad Beech Fern SC SZ G5 1897-08-30 9 Hardwood to mixed forest (forest, upland) Eaton?s Bur-marigold SC S2 G2G3 2013-10-04 29 Tidal wetland (non-forested, wetland) Estuary Bur?marigold SC S3 G4 2013?10-04 30 Tidal wetland (non-forested, wetland) Freshwater Tidal Marsh S2 2013-09-10 16 Tidal wetland (non-forested, wetland) Meadow Sedge 31 G5 2014-05-30 4 Mountain Honeysuckle 82 G5 1975-pre 1 Dry barrens (partly forested, upland),Hardwood to mixed forest (forest, upland) Narrow-leaf Arrowhead SC S2 G4G5 199908-21 3 Parker's Pipewort SC S3 G3 2013-10?04 16 Tidal wetland (non-forested, wetland) Maine Natural Areas Program Page 1 of 2 Rare and Exemplary Botanical Features Within 4 miles of Project: Stevens Commons, Hallowell, Maine State State Global Date Last Occurrence common Name Status Rank Rank Observed Number Habitat Sandbar Willow 81 G5 2012-09-28 4 Non-tidal rivershore (non-forested, seasonally wet) Showy Lady's?slipper SC S3 G4 1874-07-04 36 Forested wetland,0pen wetland, not coastal nor rivershore (non-forested, wetland) Showy Orchis Sl G5 1941 15 Hardwood to mixed forest (forest, upland) Stiff Arrowhead SC S2 G5 2011-09-27 11 Tidal wetland (non-forested, wetland) Water Stargrass SC S3 G5 1999-08-21 8 Open water (non-forested, wetland) White Adder's-mouth S1 G5 1878-06 15 Forested wetland Wild Garlic SC S2 G5 2002 18 Forested wetland,Hardwood to mixed forest (forest, upland) Maine Nature? Areas Program Page 2 of 2 Sl S2 SB S4 SS SU SNR SNA Note: G1 G2 G3 G4 GS GNR Note: Note: SC PE STATE RARITY RANKS Critically imperiled in Maine because of extreme rarity (?ve or fewer occurrences or very few remaining individuals or acres) or because some aspect of its biology makes it especially vulnerable to extirpation from the State of Maine. Imperiled in Maine because of rarity (6-20 occurrences or few remaining individuals or acres) or because of other factors making it vulnerable to further decline. Rare in Maine (20-100 occurrences). Apparently secure in Maine. Demonstrably secure in Maine. Under consideration for assigning rarity status; more information needed on threats or distribution. Not yet ranked. Rank not applicable. Current occurrence data suggests assigned rank, but lack of survey effort along with amount of potential habitat create uncertainty g. State Rarity Ranks are determined by the Maine Natural Areas Program for rare plants and rare and exemplary natural communities and ecosystems. The Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife determines State Rarity Ranks for animals. GLOBAL RARITY RANKS Critically imperiled globally because of extreme rarity (?ve or fewer occurrences or very few remaining individuals or acres) or because some aspect of its biology makes it especially vulnerable to extinction. Globally imperiled because of rarity (6-20 occurrences or few remaining individuals or acres) or because of other factors making it vulnerable to further decline. Globally rare (20-100 occurrences). Apparently secure globally. Demonstrably secure globally. Not yet ranked. Global Ranks are determined by NatureServe. STATE LEGAL STATUS State legal status is according to 5 M.R.S.A. 13076-13079, which mandates the Department of Conservation to produce and biennially update the of?cial list of Maine?s Endangered and Threatened plants. The list is derived by a technical advisory committee of botanists who use data in the Natural Areas Program?s database to recommend status changes to the Department of Conservation. Rare and in danger of being lost from the state in the foreseeable ?lture; or federally listed as Endangered. Rare and, with further decline, could become endangered; or federally listed as Threatened. ON-LEGAL STATUS SPECIAL Rare in Maine, based on available information, but not suf?ciently rare to be considered Threatened or Endangered. Potentially Extirpated; Species has not been documented in Maine in past 20 years or loss of last known occurrence has been documented. Visit our website for more information on rare, threatened, and endangered species! gov/dacf/mnap ELEMENT OCCURRENCE RANKS - E0 RANKS Element Occurrence ranks are used to describe the quality of a rare plant population or natural community based on three factors: - M: Size of community or population relative to other known examples in Maine. Community or population?s viability, capability to maintain itself. - Condition: For communities, condition includes presence of representative species, maturity of species, and evidence of human-caused disturbance. For plants, factors include species vigor and evidence of human-caused disturbance. - Landscape context: Land uses and/or condition of natural communities surrounding the observed area. Ability of the observed community or population to be protected from effects of adjacent land uses. These three factors are combined into an overall ranking of the feature of A, B, C, or D, where A indicates an excellent example of the community or population and indicates a poor example of the community or population. A rank of indicates that the community or population is extant but there is not enough data to assign a quality rank. The Maine Natural Areas Program tracks all occurrences of rare (SI-83) plants and natural communities as well as A and ranked common (84-85) natural communities. Note: Element Occurrence Ranks are determined by the Maine Natural Areas Program for rare plants and rare and exemplary natural communities and ecosystems. The Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife determines Element Occurrence tanks for animals. Visit our website for more information on rare, threatened, and endangered species! . .. Kennebec Land Trust Inc. 1988 Gs 207.377.2848 PO Box 261 - 331 Main Street Winthrop, Maine 04364 May 8, 2015 Matt Morrill 72 Burtons Lane Winthrop, Maine 04364 Dear Matt, This letter is to document communications to date regarding the Stevens School property in Hallowell, which is owned by the State of Maine. Kennebec Land Trust is in the process of fundraising to acquire a 164-acre parcel of land in Augusta kn own as Howard Hill, which abuts the northerly property line of the Stevens School property. We have also been working with the City of Hallowell to locate and acquire permanent public access to Howard Hill from Winthrop Street in Hallowell through the Stevens School property. It is our understanding that the State of Maine will soon place the Stevens School property on the market. We understand that you have an interest in acquiring a portion of the Stevens School property, which abuts your current subdivision property known as Hallowell Overlook, with the intention of expanding your residential subdivision. Kennebec Land Trust representatives and you have met on two occasions to see if there might be a way to work jointly to accomplish both of our objectives. You I prepared a concept development/ conservation Plan for purposes of discussing our mutual interests. The Plan has been modi?ed to incorporate changes that the Kennebec Land Trust suggested at our first meeting. Based on this modi?ed Plan, which is the Plan reviewed by the Kennebec Land Trust Lands Committee on May 6, 2015, we are supportive of your proposed development/ conservation plan. In summary the plan includes following: 1. You will donate fee ownership of approximately seven (7) acres, including the entire existing ?eld and the forested area surrounding the small pond to the City of Hallowell, as shown on the Plan, with a Conservation easement over its entirety to KLT. 2. You will donate a public access easement to the City of Hallowell and KLT over and across your proposed subdivision access road extending to Winthrop Street as shown on the Plan. . . 3. You will construct a small gravel parking lot accessible from your subdivisio access road on the land to be conveyed. to the City of Hallowell in the general vicinity of the parking area currently shown on the Plan. The Kennebec Land Trust will urge the City of Hallowell to be responsible for its maintenance. 4. You will place deed restrictions in the set-back zone preventing the removal of vegetation on those house lots with frontage lot lines bordering the field to be conserved in item 1 above. 5. The Kennebec Land Trust will urge the City of Hallowell to work in partnership with KLT to be responsible for constructing and maintaining any pedestrian trails and signage on the land conveyed in item 1. Kennebec Land Trust's support of your proposal is based the ?ve elements listed 1 above and as further depicted on the Plan. We appreciate the opportunity to work with you on a proposal that accomplishes both your goal for residential development and our goal for public access to Howard Hill and associated conservation lands. - Thank you for willingness to work with us in this important public recreational access endeavor. . Sincerely, 1 M??k?c/K k/Zm Jews?3 Norm drigu? Theresa Kerchner KLT Director Executive Director 7? MAINE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION 55 CAPITOL STREET 65 STATE HOUSE STATION AUGUSTA, MAINE 04333 PAUL R. LEPAGE KIRK F. MOHNEY GOVERNOR DIRECTOR September 12,2016 MI. Matt Merrill Mastway Development LLC Stevens School Campus, Baker Building Hallowell, ME 04347 Dear Mr. Morrill: In response to your recent request for information, the Maine Industrial School for Girls Historic District was listed in the National Register of Historic Places on April 22, 2003 for its signi?cance in the areas of education and social history. Please see attached the National Register nomination and map which illustrates the ?ve contributing buildings in the district. Please feel free to contact Robin Reed of our staff if we can be of further assistance in this matter. Sincerely, Kirk F. Mohney State Historic Preservation Of?cer PHONE: (207) 287-2132 FAX: (207) 287?2335 25 Vine Street Gardiner. ME 04345 (207) 582?5252 FAX (207) 5824677 mainetraf?cresources.com Maine Traffic Resources SUMMARY MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. Elliot Thayer Thayer Engineering Company, Inc. 17 Hasson Street DATE: August 26, 2016 Farmingdale, ME 04344-1613 RE: Trip Generation Analysis for Proposed Stevens School Campus Redevelopment, Phase 1A Introduction The purpose of this memorandum is to summarize trip generation and safety analysis prepared for Phase 1A of the proposed Stevens School Campus Redevelopment on Winthrop Street, in Hallowell, Maine as well as to determine any state traf?c permitting requirements. Phase 1A of the overall Master Plan includes the Baker Building, the Central Building, the Erskine Building and the Admin Building. Multiple development options are evaluated for several of the buildings. If the Central Building is redeveloped as a possible school then the Stevens Building would also be included in this phase since it should be utilized as a cafeteria and dormitory for the school. Phase 1A will also include the reconstruction of Beech Street to serve these renovated buildings. The table below shows the previous and proposed uses for each Phase 1A building: Phase 1A Existing/Previous Proposed Building Uses Building Year of Existing or Previous Currently Proposed Vacancy Use Size Use Size Baker 2015 Of?ces 11,330 SF. Of?ce Space 1St Floor: 3,776 S.F. Apartments 2nd/3rd: 10 units Central 2015 Of?ces 24,778 SF. Condos or 25 condo units or School 100 residential students Stevens 2013 Pre?Release 17,936 S.F., School Dorm For 100 students Corrections 62 inmates and Cafeteria Facility and 23 employees Erskine 2013 Storage 9,098 S.F. Small Hotel or 15 20 hotel rooms Recreation or 9,098 SF. Rec. Center Center Admin Occupied Of?ces 4,572 SF. Of?ces 4,572 SF. Page 1 Stevens School Campus Redevelopment, Phase 1A 8/26/2016 Previous Trip Generation There is a credit for grandfathered pre-existing trips in terms of state traf?c permitting for trips that were in place ten years back. The number of trips generated by the existing buildings for the previous uses was estimated using the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) ?Trip Generation, 7th Edition? report, the edition currently used by the Maine Department of Transportation (MaineDOT) for traf?c permitting purposes. Land use codes (LUCs) 710 General Of?ce and 150 Warehousing for the storage facilities were used on the basis of square footage. LUC 571 Prison was used on the basis of the average of 62 beds and 23 employees. The results are summarized in the following table: Previous Trip Generation (one-way trip-ends) Stevens Time Period Baker Central Beds Emp. Avg. Erskine Admin Total Weekday 126 274 46 50 496+ AM Peak Hour Adj. Street Entering Exiting Peak Hour Generator Entering Exiting Peak Hour Adj. Street Entering 3 6 1 1 1 12 Exiting Peak Hour Generator Entering Exiting demonstrated above, the ?ve potential buildings generate a trip credit of 80 AM peak hour trips and 83 PM peak hour trips in terms of state traf?c permitting. However, it should be noted that if the school option is not pursued for the Central and Stevens Buildings, the Stevens Building will not be included in this phase and trip credits will be 68 AM peak hour trips and 67 PM peak hour trips. Proposed Trip Generation The number of trips to be generated by the potential new uses was estimated using the same methodology previously described. For the Baker Building, LUCs 710 General Of?ce and 220 Apartments were used on the basis of 3,776 SF. and ten (10) dwelling units. The results for the Baker Building are shown in the following table: Page 2 Stevens School Campus Redevelopment, Phase 1A 8/26/2016 Baker Trip Generation (one-way trip-ends) Time Period ?rm Apartments ItLal Weekday 42 68 110 AM Peak Hour Generator 6 6 12 PM Peak Hour Generator 6 7 13 The Central Building and Stevens Building uses are currently unknown. The two buildings were estimated together because they have the potential to be combined as a private middle school for 100 students with on?site housing and cafeteria. If the school option is not pursued, the Central Building is proposed to be 25 condominium units while the Stevens Building will not be redeveloped in this Phase 1A. As such, LUCs 230 Residential Condominium/Townhouse and 550 University or College were utilized. The university land use code was utilized because the middle school trip rate does not adequately represent this school, since most, if not all, of the students will be housed on campus and will not be traveling to school on a daily basis. As a result, this potential school is more properly modeled by a university, as many students will live on campus with some commuters. The trips for the two possible options are shown in the following table: Central/Stevens Trip Generation (one-way trip-ends) Time Period Con?dos Weekday 148 238 AM Peak Hour Generator ll 21 PM Peak Hour Generator 13 24 As shown above, the school option for the Central Building results in higher trip generation and will be used as the basis of this analysis, to be conservative. There are also two potential uses for the Erskine Building at this time, as a recreational community center or as a boutique hotel. As such, LUCs 310 Hotel and 495 Recreational Community Center were utilized on the basis of 20 hotel rooms and 9,098 SF respectively. The results are summarized below: Erskine Trip Generation (one-way trip-ends) Time Period Ho_tel Rec. Center Weekday 164 208 AM Peak Hour Generator 11 24 PM Peak Hour Generator 12 22 Page 3 Stevens School Campus Redevelopment, Phase 1A 8/26/2016 The total trip estimate for the proposed Phase 1A of the Stevens School Redevelopment, including the existing Admin Building which is remaining as is, is shown in the table below: Total Proposed Trip Generation (one-way trip?ends) Time Period Baker Central/Stevens Erskine Admin Total Weekday Peak Hour Generator 12 21 24 7 64 Entering 8 l7 l3 6 44 Exiting 4 4 1 20 PM Peak Hour Generator 13 24 22 7 66 Entering 6 7 9 1 23 Exiting demonstrated above, the anticipated Phase 1A of the Stevens School Redevelopment effort is expected to generate 64 trips during the AM peak hour and 66 trips during the PM peak hour. As mentioned previously, this analysis is conservative since it used the highest generating land use code for the buildings that have multiple redevelopment options, i.e. the school versus the condos for the Central and Stevens Buildings and the recreational center versus the hotel for the Erskine Building. The proposed trips compared to the pre?existing state grandfathered trips are shown in the table below for the peak hour periods: Change in ITE Trip Generation Time Period Mg Proposed New Trips Weekday 496+ 606 less than 110 AM Peak Hour - Generator 80 64 ?16 PM Peak Hour Generator 83 66 -17 As seen above, the proposed Phase 1A is expected to generate 16 fewer trips during the weekday AM peak hour and 17 fewer trips during the weekday PM peak hour than the former uses. As a result, a Traf?c Movement Permit (TMP) is not required from the Maine Department of Transportation (MaineDOT) for this phase of the project, since new trip generation will not exceed the 100-trip threshold during any peak hour. This estimate is also expected to be conservative since the higher land use generators were assumed for each building. Also, given the projected trip levels of Phase 1A no significant impact would be expected off?site on traf?c operations. Typically, a project will not have any measurable impact unless it generates in excess of 25 to 35 new lane hour trips. Given the entering and exiting trips will be divided between eastbound and westbound direction, the trips will be below these lane levels. Page 4 Stevens School Campus Redevelopment, Phase 1A 8/26/2016 Safety Analysis Accident Review The Maine Department of Transportation uses two criteria to determine high crash locations (HCLs). The ?rst is the critical rate factor (CRF), which is a measure of the accident rate. A CRF greater than one indicates a location which has a higher than expected accident rate. The expected rate is calculated as a statewide average of similar facilities. The second criterion, which must also be met, is based upon the number of accidents that occur at a particular location. Eight or more accidents must occur over the three?year study period for the location to be considered a high crash location. Accident data was obtained from MaineDOT for the vicinity of the campus, which is attached to this memorandum. The CRF and number of accidents are summarized by location for the most recent three-year period, 2013 to 2015, below: Winthrop Street Location Description of Ace. CE Intersection of Whitten Road 3 0.89 Between Whitten Road and Overlook Drive 1 0.10 Between Overlook Drive and High Street 2 0.22 Between Pleasant Street and Warren Street 1 0.50 Intersection of Warren Street 2 0.73 Intersection of Middle Street 1 0.33 As can be seen in the above table, there are no high crash locations, or locations approaching the high crash criteria on Winthrop Street in the vicinity of the site. As a result, no additional accident review or evaluation is necessary. Sight Distance Review One of the most important factors to consider for a project is sight distance from the access drives. Sight distance is measured ten feet back from the edge of travel way at a driver?s height of 3.5 feet to an object height of 4.25 feet. Maine Traf?c Resources (MTR) recommends a minimum sight distance of 250 feet for the 25 area speed zone. Sight distance was measured from the Winthrop Street intersections of Beech Street and Coos Lane as well as a potential relocation of Coos Lane and Stevens Street. The results are summarized below: Driveway Sight Distance Summary Available Available Drive Description/Relocation To Left Adeguate To Right Adequate Beech Street 400?+ Yes 400?+ Yes Existing Coos Lane 400?+ Yes 240? Marginal Page 5 Stevens School Campus RedeveloPment, Phase 1A 8/26/20 6 Available Available Drive Description/Relocation Adeguate To Right Adequate Potential Coos Lane 50? to west 400?+ Yes 250? Just Meets Minimum Potential Coos Lane 70? to west 400?+ Yes 275 Yes Stevens Street 400?+ Yes 250? Just Meets Minimum Stevens Street 25? to east 400?+ Yes 275? Yes The sight distance from each roadway to the left is more than adequate. Beech Street also provides adequate sight distance to the right. However, existing Coos Lane and Stevens Street both have a sight distance of approximately 250 feet or less to the right, which is considered marginal forthe 25 mile per hour zone. Sight distance to the right is limited by the crest of the hill on Winthrop Street. It is understood that this concern has also been voiced by the City of Hallowell. For that reason, Thayer Engineering has proposed moving Coos Lane approximately 50 feet west of the existing location. This provides 250 feet of sight distance to the right, which just meets the recommended minimum. An additional 20? of relocation would vastly improve sight distance. The following options can resolve the sight distance issues: 0 Remove Coos Lane as an exit point (entrance only) and have traffic exit at Beech Street. 0 Move Coos Lane at least 50 feet west (center to center) from the existing location to obtain a minimum of 250? of sight distance. - Relocate Stevens Street 25 feet to the east to provide additional sight distance. With any of the above, Coos Lane would provide for safe operations. Stevens Street could also be improved with similar modi?cations if this roadway is to be maintained versus closed. As always, do not hesitate to contact me if you or the City of Hallowell have any questions regarding this trip generation and safety analysis for the proposed Phase 1A redevelopment effort at the Stevens School campus. . OF Sincerely, A /7 at: DIANE w. *2 I MORABITO . . 3 No.5077 Dlane W.Morab1to,P.E. PTOE President @0 eke ??"nuntl?u?? #83 IONAL 6 a Maine Department Of Transportation - Traffic Engineering, Crash Records Section Crash Summary Report Report Selections and Input Parameters REPORT SELECTIONS Crash Summary I DSection Detail Crash Summary ll D1320 Public : 1320 Private D1320 Summary REPORT DESCRIPTION Winthrop St. REPORT PARAMETERS Year 2013, Start Month 1 through Year 2015 End Month: 12 Route: 1140045 Start Node: 25405 Start Offset: 0 EIExclude First Node End Node: 25519 End Offset: 0 : Exclude Last Node Page 1 of 12 on 7/29/2016, 1:49 PM Maine Department Of Transportation - Traffic Engineering, Crash Records Section Crash Summar Node Route MP Node Description Total Injury Crashes PercentAnnual Crash Rate Critical CRF Crashes A pD Injury Ent-Veh 25405 1140045 - 66.7 2.976 0.34 0.38 0.00 Statewide Crash Rate: 0.13 71407 1140045 - 0.0.0 1.167 0.00 0.48 0.00 Statewide Crash Rate: 0.13 25407 1140045 - 0.74 lntOleGH ST WINTHROP 0.0 2.365 0.00 0.41 0.00 Statewide Crash Rate: 0.13 25408 1140045 - 0.99 0f PLEASANT ST WINTHROP 0.0 2.263 0.00 0.41 0.00 Statewide Crash Rate: 0.13 25933 1140045 - 1.04 Int 0f WARREN ST WINTHROP 0.0 2.255 0.30 0.41 0.00 Statewide Crash Rate: 0.13 25932 1140045 - 1.09 Inf ST WINTHROP 0.0 2.306 0.00 0.41 0.00 Statewide Crash Rate: 0.13 25519 1140045 1.13 Int 01? MIDDLE 0.0 2.659 0.13 0.40 0.00 Statewide Crash Rate: 0.13 Study Years: 3.00 NODE TOTALS33.3 15.991 0.13 0.25 0.49 Page 2 of 12 on 7/29/2016, 1:49 PM Crash Summar Maine Department Of Transportation - Traffic Engineering, Crash Records Section Start End Element Offset Route - MP Section Total Injury Crashes Percent Annual Crash Rate Critical CRF Node Node Begin - End Length Crashes A pD Injury HMVM Rate 25405 71407 4040542 0 - 0.39 1140045 - 0 0.100.0 0.00910 36.61 356.74 0.00 Int of WHITTEN RD WINTHROP ST RD INV 11 40045 Statewide Crash Rate: 171.14 71407 25407 4040543 0 - 0.35 1140045 - 0-39 0.0.0 0.00817 81.59 365.98 0.00 of OVERLOOK DR WINTHROP ST RD INV 11 40045 Statewide Crash Rate: 171.14 25407 25408 3122370 0 - 0.25 1140045 - 0-74 0.0.0 0.00563 0.00 400.82 0.40045 Statewide Crash Rate: 171.14 25408 25933 3118029 0 0.05 1140045 - 0-99 0.0.0 0.00109 306.61 607.92 0.00 Int of PLEASANT ST WINTHROP ST RD WV 11 40045 Statewide Crash Rate: 171.14 25932 25933 3131823 0 - 0.05 1140045 -1-04 0.0.0 0.00113 0.00 602.14 0.00 int of SPRING ST WINTHROP ST RD INV 11 40045 Statewide Crash Rate: 171.14 25519 25932 3122371 0 0.04 1140045 -1-09 0.0.0 0.00092 0.00 631.58 0.00 of MIDDLE ST WINTHROP ST RD INV 11 40045 Statewide Crash Rate: 171.14 Study Years: 3.00 Section Totals: 1.25.0 0.02605 51.19 285.30 0.18 Grand Totals: 1.30.0 0.02605 127.98 324.94 0.39 Page 3 of 12 on 7/29/2016, 1:49 PM 254 as. "11409 - {.7140.01, HA ow ?my. ll__ 33 I, .260? - STEVE 4 0V 1: . 3 25407 SCHOOL ?If - *0 ~11 DDIJPLEX 5; 1? l, .5 2553026013 I 25937 A 23997 25995 a 25933! .. a? 25936? e? 25m ?25520 I64965 . :2 i at: mag. 25555 Fr 35994 25932 (565,: H.-. 25519 a 25557 a? .. a: 25934 35935 can 28068 5 at if: 5 I 36012 53 i3 255%? (?259 3 25558! 27760 9 260? 255593 25 :3 54094 25939 1- 35990 25992 5 hip-4 (25931 Date: 7/29/2016 Time: 1:47:14 PM 0.25 ?Miles 1 inch 0.18 miles The Maine Depa rlment of Transportation prowdes this publication for information only. Rel ianceupon this information is at oserrisk. it is subject to revision and may be incomplete depending upon changing conditions. The Department assumes no liability if injuries or damages result from this information. This map is not intended to sup port emergency dispatch: Maine 25 Vine Street Gardiner, ME 04345 Traffic (207)582-5252 FAX (207) 582-1677 Resources 2 mainetraf?cresourceseom SUMMARY MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. Elliot Thayer DATE: September 6, 2016 Thayer Engineering Company, Inc. 17 Hasson Street Farmingdale, ME 04344-1613 RE: Trip Generation Analysis for Overall Stevens School Campus Redevelopment Master Plan Introduction The purpose of this memorandum is to summarize trip generation analysis prepared for the overall Master Plan for the proposed Stevens School Campus Redevelopment on Winthrop Street in Hallowell, Maine. The overall Master Plan consists of three phases. The table below shows the existing campus buildings along with their previous and proposed uses as well as their year of vacancy: Building Year Existing or Previous Currently Proposed of Vacancy Use Size Use Size Baker 2015 Of?ces 11,330 SF. Of?ce Space 1St Floor: 3,776 SF. Apartments 2?d/3rd Floors 10 units Central 2015 Of?ces 24,778 SF. Condos or 25 condo units or 100 School students Stevens 2013 Pre-Release 17,936 SF, School Dorm For 100 students or Corrections 62 inmates Cafeteria or 17,936 SF. Facility 23 employees Retail/Restaurant Erskine 2013 Storage 9,098 SF. Small Hotel or 9,098 SF. Rec. Center Admin - Of?ces 4,572 SF. Of?ces 4,572 SF. Occupied Of?ces 8,352 SF. Senior Housing 12 16 units, 8,352 SF. 2012 Cleveland 2010 Of?ces 6,061 SF. Senior Housing 8 10 units, 6,061 SF. Hayden 2015 Storage 6,300 SF. To Be Removed arwell 2006 Of?ces 3,228 SF. Convenience 3,228 SF. and 4 fuelng Store positions Page 1 Stevens School Campus Overall Master Plan September 6, 2016 Each of the existing buildings is proposed to be included in Phase 1 of the project. In addition, Phase 1 is proposing two new senior housing buildings. The ?rst is proposed to be approximately 3,000 SF, providing from six to eight dwelling units. The other building is proposed to be 7,000 SF, providing for 12 to 14 units. Phase 1 will also include up to 14 duplex units and 11 single-family house lots. Phases 2 and 3 are expected to consist of up to 22 and 15 single-family housing lots, respectively on the most northerly and easterly portions of the land. Previous Trip Generation There is a credit for grandfathered pre-existing trips in terms of state traf?c permitting. The number of trips generated by the nine existing buildings, ten years back, was estimated using the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) ?Trip Generation, 7th Edition? report, the edition currently used by the Maine Department of Transportation (MaineDOT) for traf?c permitting purposes. Land use codes (LUCs) 710 General Of?ce on the basis of 58,321 S.F., 150 Warehousing on the basis of 15,398 SE for storage buildings and 571 Prison on the basis of the average of 62 beds and 23 employees were utilized. The results are summarized in the following table: Previous Trip Generation (one-way trip-ends) Pre?Release Time Period Of?ces E_mp. Mg. Storage Total Weekday 642 76 718+ AM Peak Hour Adj. Street 90 6 10 8 7 105 Entering 79 3 7 5 6 90 Exiting Peak Hour Generator 90 12 12 9 1 Entering 79 7 7 5 91 Exiting Peak Hour Adj. Street 87 3 5 4 7 98 Entering 15 0 1 1 2 18 Exiting Peak Hour Generator 87 I6 16 9 112 Entering 15 4 4 1 20 Exiting 72 12 12 8 92 As demonstrated above, the entire Stevens School Campus previously generated 111 one- way trips during the AM peak hour and 112 trips during the PM peak hour based upon the ITE data. Page 2 Stevens School Campus Overall Master Plan September 6, 2016 Proposed Trip Generation The number of trips to be generated by the proposed buildings for Phase 1 was estimated in two phases, Phase 1A and 1B. Trip generation for the proposed Phase 1A is outlined in more detail in the memorandum by Maine Traf?c Resources dated August 26, 2016 and a summary is provided below: Phase 1A Proposed Trip Generation (one-way trip-ends) Time Period Baker Central/ Stevens Erskine Admin Total Weekday 110 238 208 50 606 AM Peak Hour Generator 12 21 24 7 64 Entering 8 l7 1 3 6 44 Exiting 4 4 1 20 PM Peak Hour Generator 13 24 22 7 66 Entering 6 7 9 1 23 Exiting 7 17 13 6 43 As seen above, Phase 1A is expected to generate 64 AM peak hour trips and 66 PM peak hour trips. However, this analysis assumed that the Central and Stevens buildings would be a middle school with associated on-site housing and a cafeteria. If the school option is not pursued, the Central Building may instead be condominiums (25 dwelling units) while the Stevens Building is proposed to be retail and/or restaurant space. LUC 814 Specialty Retail was used to estimate trips for the retail/restaurant option for the Stevens Building. The trips for the specialty retail and condos compared to the school option are shown in the following table: Central/Stevens Trip Generation Options (one-way trip-ends) Time Period Ms Spec. Retail m1 Weekday 148 796 944 238 AM Peak Hour Generator 1 123 134 21 PM Peak Hour Generator 13 90 103 24 As demonstrated above, the specialty retail and condominium option would generate greater trips than the school option. For this reason, this option will be considered in the total for Phase 1, instead of the school, to be conservative. The remainder of the trips for Phase 1 were estimated using LUCs 252 Senior Housing Attached on the basis of up to 48 units for the Flagg/Drummer, Cleveland and proposed new buildings, 853 Convenience Market with Gas Pumps on the basis of the average of 3,228 SF. and four (4) ?ieling positions for the Farwell Building and 210 Single-Family Detached Housing for the eight (8) duplex units and 11 house lots. The more recent ITE 9th Edition was used for the senior housing, as there is more data available, which is considered to be more reliable. The overall Phase 1 results are shown in the following table: Page 3 Stevens School Campus Overall Master Plan September 6, 2016 Proposed Phase 1 Trip Generation (one-way trip-ends) Phase 1A Senior Convenience Market Single Time Period w/ Stevens Housing Pumps Mg. Family Total Weekday 1,312 166 2,730 2,170 2,450 182 4,110 AM Peak Hour Generator 177 19 147 69 108 15 319 Entering 88 9 73 34 54 4 155 Exiting Peak Hour Generator 145 17 202 80 141 19 322 Entering 67 9 101 40 7O 12 158 Exiting seen above, Phase 1 of the Master Plan will generate a total of 319 AM peak hour trips and 322 PM peak hour trips. Trip generation for the entire Master Plan development including Phase 2 (22 single family homes) and Phase 3 (15 single family homes) is summarized below: Overall Master Plan Trip Generation Time Period Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Total Weekday 4,1 10 212 144 4,466 AM Peak Hour Generator 319 17 12 348 Entering 5 5 4 3 162 Exiting 164 13 9 186 PM Peak Hour Generator 322 22 15 359 Entering 15 8 14 10 182 Exiting 164 8 5 177 As shown above, the entire three phase Master Plan is expected to generate 348 trips during the AM peak hour period and 359 trips during the PM peak hour period. It is important to note that these trip estimates assume the higher numbers when there are use options for buildings and also the higher number of units when ranges have been provided. Hence, these totals are expected to be conservative. The currently proposed Master Plan trips are compared to the grandfathered previous trips in the table below: ITE Change in Trip Generation Time Period Previous Uses Proposed Uses New Trips AM Peak Hour - Generator 111 348 +237 Entering 91 162 +71 Exiting 20 186 +166 PM Peak Hour Generator 1 12 359 +247 Entering 20 182 +162 Exiting 92 177 +85 Page 4 Stevens School Campus Overall Master Plan September 6, 2016 As can be seen in the preceding table, the proposed overall Stevens School Campus Redevelopment is expected to generate 237 new trips during the weekday AM peak hour and 247 new one?way trips during the PM peak hour period over the grandfathered trips, assuming the higher trip generating uses, such as the retail/restaurant option for the Stevens building and the maximum number of proposed dwelling units, at full build out. As a result, a Traf?c Movement Permit (TMP) will be required from the Maine Department of Transportation (MaineDOT) since new trip generation will exceed the IOO-trip threshold during both the AM and PM peak hours. Based upon the uses assumed in this analysis the application will be a 200 level application, requiring a full traf?c study. A TMP will not be needed for the currently proposed Phase 1A since that phase is projected to generate less traf?c than the previous Stevens School Campus. Additionally, a permit will not be required from MaineDOT until the development generates 100 trips over the previously grandfathered trips. Therefore, it is important to note that the redevelopment effort will not need to obtain a TMP from MaineDOT until the new uses generate 210 total AM peak hour trips and 211 PM peak hour trips. It is recommended that as businesses and uses are con?rmed for the buildings that the trip generation analysis be updated accordingly so that the owner will be aware when the trip threshold will be crossed and a TMP will be required for further development. As always, do not hesitate to contact me if you or the City of Hallowell have any questions regarding this trip generation analysis. . 4194/ Sincerely, I 53 DIANE w. [40,0 4/ g" MORABITO - No' 5077 Diane W. Morabito, P.E. PTOE President 2 2'3, 9% I I I ONAL Page 5 12:1)er Project Summary Ted Berry Company 521 Federal Rd Livermore Maine 04253 207-897?3348 Project Name: IMastway Development US MH US Ml-l Pipe ID Date Street 7 Material Size Total 7 Boiler House SMH-1240 BOtleF 6/10/2016 Baker Lane PolyVinyI Chloride 4 0 16.8 House-SMH-1240 Farwell Tee Farwell Building-Tee 6/10/2016 Winthrop St PolyVinyl Chloride 4 108.6 108.6 Building Connection Connection Stevens 48-4FT down Stevens Building-dd4 6/9/2016 Winthrop St PolyVinyI Chloride 4 0 90 Building from down from MH SMH-3217 Pipe Size: 4 Total Ln.: 108.6 Inspected Ln.: 215.4 US MH 08 MH Pipe ID Date Street Material . Size Total End Of Pipe 1254A 3329 6/8/2016 X-Country Cast Iron 6 0 196.8 Admin 21-9FT down Admin BUildinQ-21-9FT 6/10/2016 Winthrop St PolyVinyl Chloride 202.8 102.8 Building from down from MH SMH-1215 Admin 21 -9FT down Admin Building-21-9FT 6/9/2016 Winthrop St PonVinyl Chloride 6 202.8 100 Building from down from MH SMH-1215 Baker Building SMH-2701 Baker 618/2016 Yard and Power Lines PonVinyl Chloride 6 0 27 Building?SMH-2701 Central 3FT down Central Building-3FT 6/8/2016 Baker Lane Vitri?ed Clay Pipe 6 0 2.9 Building from down from MH SMH-1246 Erskine Hall SMH-1234 Erskine Hall Lateral-Mr 6/8/2016 Beech St PonVinyl Chloride 53.5 Hayden SMH-1254 Hayden 6/10/2016 Beech St Cast Iron 6 118.2 House House?SMH-1254 Hayden Hayden 6/10/2016 Beech St Cast Iron 6 0 130.7 House House-SMH?1254 Pipe Size: 6 Total Ln.: 202.8 Inspected Ln.: 731.9 US NH 03 MH Pipe ID Date Street Material Size Total Insp/ SMH-2700 1009 6/8/2016 Power Lines Vitri?ed Clay Pipe 8 0 123.5 SMH-2700 SMH-1159 1009 6/9/2016 Power Lines Vitri?ed Clay Pipe 8 0 49.2 SMH-1234 3004 6/8/2016 Parking Lot PolyVinyI Chloride 8 170.5 170.5 SMH-1246 SMH-1240 3010 6/8/2016 Baker Lane Vitri?ed Clay Pipe 8 34.5 31.5 SMH-1246 SMH-124O 3010 6/8/2016 Baker Lane Vitri?ed Clay Pipe 8 34.5 3 SMH-1250 SMH-1246 3011 6/8/2016 Baker Lane PonVinyl Chloride 8 65 65 SMH-2701 SMH-2700 3014 6/8/2016 Power Lines Cross Country PolyVinyl Chloride 8 168.6 71.4 SMH-2701 3014 6/8/2016 Power Lines Cross Country PolyVinyI Chloride 8 168.6 168.6 SMH-1240 SMH-2701 3015 6/8/2016 Baker Lane PonVinyI Chloride 8 233.4 233.4 SMH-1254A SMH-1254 3329A 6/8/2016 Cross Country PonVinyl Chloride 8 78.4 78.4 1254 1252 997 6/8/2016 Beech St PonVinyl Chloride 8 66.5 66.5 SMH-1252 SMH-1234 998 6/8/2016 Beech St PolyVinyI Chloride 8 280.3 280.3 Pipe Size: 8 Total Ln.: 1097.2 Inspected Ln.: 1341.3 Project Total Ln.: 1408.6 Project Inspected Ln.: 2288.6 Mastway Development Page #1 1 Ted Berry Co. Inc. 521 Federal Road Livermore, Maine 04253 Of?ce: 207-897-3348 Fax: 207-897-3627 Mastway Development Hallowell, ME Stevens School Revitalization Project Manager Matt Timberlake Field Superviso Roger Moulton Defect Listing Plot with Images Ted Berry Company 521 Federal Rd Livermore Maine 04253 207-897-3348 Customer City Street Date Time Mastway Development Hallowell ME Cross Country 20160608 07:57 Surveyed By Certi?cate Number Work Order Location Code Weather Roger_Moulton U-312-15001 M-16-00429 Yard Dry Purpose of Survey Project Name Routine Assessment Stevens School Revitalization Quick Struct. Rating 2100 Pipe segment Reference 0 kM t' NIA 3329A wc am a mg Upstream MH MH Quick Overall Rating 21 00 SMH-1254A Slim-1.1 254 Length surveyed Material Shape Height Width 78.4 PolyVinyl Chloride Circular 8 8 Direction Sewer Use Flow Control Pre-Cleaning Lining Method Upstream Sanitary Not Controlled No Pre-Cleaning Remarks Condition Assessment SM H-1254 '1 l? .. 0.0 ft. Manhole 0.0 ft. Water Level 60.7 ft. Water Level Sag - 801 2 65.8 ft. Water Level Sag F01 2 78.4 ft. Manhole SMH-1254A Mastway Development Page #2 2 Historic District In January of 2003 Christi Mitchell of Maine Historic Preservation submitted an application to the United States Department of the Interior, National Parks Service to have the Maine Industrial School for Girls/ Stevens School added to the National Register of Historic Places. The nomination was accepted by the National Parks Service and in April of 2003 the nomination was accepted and the Maine Industrial School for Girls Historic District was added to the National Register of Historic Places. A copy of which is attached here to. Included in the historic district are five historic buildings and a historic boundary which encompasses the historic buildings and a central quad. During re-development of this property it will be a priority to preserve the historic buildings and quad?s historic character and charm, within reason and financial feasibility. Due to poor conditions of some of the buildings, significant renovations will have to be performed and possibly demolition of one historic structures. The costliness of the renovations for the historic buildings will certainly require the use of State and Federal historic tax credits to make the re-purposing of these buildings possible. By utilizing the historic tax credits, the renovation will have to be approved and guided by the Department of the Interiors guidelines for the treatment of historic structures. Since it is also intended that each building will be separated onto its own associated parcel, a Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions will be attached to each deed that will create a list of responsibilities to preserve and maintain the important historic features. The covenants will run with the land so that the historic buildings and quad will be both enhanced and permanently preservedartist?s impression of the revitalized Stevens Commons as seen from the middle of the Campus/Beech Street 36 NPS Form 10?900 em OMB No. 10024-0018 (Oct. 1990) 2280 7 United States Department of the Interior 7 7 1-. National Park Service I National Register of Historic Places Registration Form .. . .. This form is for use in nominating or requesting determinations for individual properties and districts. See instructions in How to Complete the National Register of Historic Places Registration Form (National Register Bulletin 16A). Complete each item by marking in the apprOpriate box or by entering the information requested. if an item does not apply to the pr0perty being documented. enter for "not applicable.? For functions. architectural classi?cation, materials, and areas of signi?cance. enter only categories and subcategories from the instructions. Place additional entries and narrative items on continuation sheets (NPS Form 10-900a). Use a typewriter, word processor. or computer. to complete all items. 1. Name of Property historic name Maine Industrial School for Gins Historic District other names/site number State School for Girls in Hallowell; Stevens School 2. Location street 8. number North side of Winthrop Street, .5 miles west of intersection with Water Street not for publication city or town Hallowell vicinity state Maine code ME county Kennebec code 011 zip code 04347 3. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended. hereby certify that this 8 nomination Cl request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CF Part 60. In my opinion, the property 8 meets Eldoes not meet the National Register criteria. 1 recommend that this property be considered signi?cant nationally statewide locally. El See continuation sheet for additional comments.) goal. Signature of cenifinJfficial/Titie 096 Maine Historic Preservation Commission State or Federal agency and bureau in my opinion, the property meets El does not meet the National Register criteria. See continuation sheet for additional comments.) . Signature of certifying of?cial/Title Date State or Federal agency and bureau 4. Natipnal Park Service Certi?cation A /w 4/ ?n heryertify that this property is: Wgnature 7h Date of Action entered in the National Register. A 2 7 See continuation sheet. El determined eligible for the National Register. See continuation sheet. [Ii determined not eligible for the National Register. Cl removed from the National Register. CI other, (explain): MAINE INDUSTRIAL SCHOOL FOR GIRLS HISTORIC DISTRICT Name of Property KENNEBEC CO.. MAINE County and State 5. Classi?cation Ownership of Property Category of Property (Check as many boxes as apply) (Check only one box) El private El building(s) Cl public-local a district a public-State El site El public-Federal structure CI object Name of related multiple property listing (Enter if property is not part of a multiple property listing.) Number of Resourceswithin Property (Do not include previously listed resources in the count.) Contributing Noncontributing 5 3 buildings 1 sites structures objects 6 3 Total Number of contributing resources previously listed in the National Register 6. Function or Use Historic Functions (Enter categories from instructions) EDUCATION School EDUCATION Education-related DOMESTIC Institutional housino HEALTH CARE Host?al Current Functions (Enter categories from instructions) GOVERNMENT Correctional FacilitiL GOVERNMENT Government Of?ce 7. Description Architectural Classification (Enter categories from instructions) LATE VICTORIAN ltalianate LATE AND 20TH CENTURY REVIVALS I Colonial Revival Narrative Description Materials (Enter categories from instructions) foundation Granite walls BriCk, weatherboard. Granite roof Asphalt, slate other Copper (Describe the historic and current condition of the property on one or more continuation sheets.) NPS FORM 10-900-a OMB Approval No. 1024-0018 (8-35) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet MAINE INDUSTRIAL SCHOOL FOR GIRLS HISTORIC DISTRICT KENNEBEC CO. MAINE Section number 7 Page 2 DESCRIPTION Contributing Site The Maine Industrial School for Girls is a small campus facility constructed on an eastern facing hill higt above the commercial center of Hallowell, Maine. Once the location of a nineteenth century farm, the site has been extensively graded, to create a north south stretching terrace on which the facilities buildings are located. The earliest structures on the site were FIagg?Dummer Hall (built in 1874 and destroyed by fire and rebuilt in 1899, later destroyed and rebuilt in 1969) followed by Building Number 2 (built in 1885, destroyed by ?re in 1900), Baker Hall, 1898 and Erskine Hall, 1902. Each Of these buildings were originally oriented along a drive that crossed the terrace from Winthrop Street on the south, to an oak grove in the west. The buildings were oriented either to take in the view towards the east or, in the case of Baker and the Administration Building, to face the entrance to the campus. Agricultural fields, barns and out buildings, as well as a caretakers cottage were located to the west, where thehill leveled at a natural plateau. This north-south alignment of buildings continued with the construction Of the Central Building in 1917, although in this case the structure was placed on the east side of the drive and thus its main facade faced west. However, when Stevens Hall, the final element of the historic campus ,was started in 1936, it was placed not along the main drive, but was located approximately 300 feet to the west, directly across from and facing the Central Building. This had the effect of enclosing a green space between Erskine Hall on the north, Central Hall on the east, Stevens Hall on the west and the Administration building and Baker Hall on the south. Narrow drives Circle the green and wrap around each building; walking paths criss-cross the green, and a line of crab apple treesis planted on the axis between the front doors of the Central and Stevens buildings. Mature maple trees line the original north-south drive, giving testimony to the original layout of the school. Several modern buildings associated with the last era of the Stevens School are located further to the west and north, or below the ridge of the historic campus. Today, the Maine lndUstrie School for Girls Historic District encompasses the campus setting created by the ?ve existing pre-1936 buildings, as well as the common located between them. Contributing Structures 1. Baker Building, 1898 Architect: J. Thissel Sons, Clinton Massachusetts Contractor: Llewellyn E. Bradstreet, Gardiner, Maine The Baxter Building is a story brick structure with a raised basement. The T-shaped structure faces south, with a small projecting central bay on the facade of the building. The rear wing stretches north from the center of the rear elevation. Metal ?re escapes are positioned at second floor doors on each end Of the structure. The building has a steep, asphalt hip roof covering the entire structure, except the projecting central bay, which is topped with a simple gable. Four gable dormers with Clapboard siding punctuate the southern roof plane, two on either side of the projecting central bay. On each of the FORM 10-900-a OMB Approval No. 1024-0013 (8?86) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service a National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet MAINE INDUSTRIAL SCHOOL FOR GIRLS HISTORIC DISTRICT KENNEBEC co., MAINE Section number 7 Page 3 other elevations a single dormer is centered on the plane of the roof. A single massive chimney is positioned in the center of the building. The main facade of the building. is 13 bays wide with a small wooden entry and door positioned on the east side of the central bay. The symmetrical facade contains five six?over-six windows on either side of the three bay central section. All of the windows are set in wooden frames with rounded tops and set on granite sills. Although essentially a building characterized more by function than style, the Baker Building displays decorative brick corbeling at the eave line that is characteristic of ltalianate architecture. A granite string course separates the raised basement from the ?rst ?oor, and a brick string course articulates the distinction between the first and second ?oors. As originally constructed, the central projection was fronted by a one story wooden porch, which has since been removed. The Baker Building currently houses the Maine State Department of Marine Resources. The architectural ?rm of J. Thistle and Sons had previously completed two buildings at the Lancaster School for Girls in Lancaster, Massachusetts. The first building is described as a dormitory building dating to 1899, while the other was used for industrial purposes, with plans dating to 1897. Other Thistle commissions included commercial blocks in Maynard, Massachusetts, and tenement housing and several schools in Lancaster. The only known commissions in Maine are at the Maine Industrial School for girls. 2. Erskine Hall, 1901-02 Architect: J. Thissel Sons, Clinton, Massachusetts Erskine Hall is very similar in form and design to Baker Hall; both were designed by architect Joshua Thissel of the Worcester Massachusetts area, and closely resemble the Fay Cottage at the Lancaster Industrial School for Girls in Lancaster, Massachusetts. Also constructed of brick, the hip roof Erskine Hall is covered in slate. There are three dormers on the east facing facade, and one on each of the other roof planes. The windows on the front facade of Erskine Hall are two-over-two sash set between granite lintels and sills; four-over-four sash are found on the remaining elevations. The eave line is emphasized by decorative brick corbeling, and a brick string course again articulates the ?rst and second floor levels. The single chimney is placed toward the west on the western leg of the building. While this structure was also built with a two-story porch attached to the projecting central bay, it still retains a second, south facing, one- story wooden porch with scroll work railing, across the long axis of the rear leg. This porch looks out over the common that forms the nucleus of the historic district. The building is currently vacant. 3. Administration Building, 1905-06 . Architect: William Miller, Lewiston (1866-1929) Contractor: Llewellyn E. Bradstreet, Gardiner Situated across the entrance drive from the Baker Building is the Colonial Revival Administration Building, constructed in 1905?05 by architect William R. Miller of Lewiston. This building stands apart from NPS FORM 10-900-3 OMB Approva! NO. 1024-0018 (8-86) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet MAINE SCHOOL FOR GIRLS HISTORIC DISTRICT KENNEBEC co., MAINE Section number 7 Page 4 the remainder of the historic campus in style and materials. It is a two?and-a-half story, hip roofed four- square structure with dormers, and an attached two story porch on the front. The building is sheathed in clapboards, and the corners are decorated with over-scale wooden quoins. At the overhanging eaves a wide frieze with dental mouldings wrap around the building and the porch. Four rectangular columns support the ?at roof of the porch; while a pair of one story Doric columns accentuate the entrance bay at the top of a wide staircase. The ?ve bay facade features a central door surrounded by transom lights and side lights; directly above a similarly styled door leads to the second ?oor of the porch. The remaining bays are marked by one-over?one windows with flared key-stone lintels. The south, north and west roof planes have hipped dormers, each containing a large center window ?anked by narrow one?over -one sash. Two chimneys are present, one on the northeast corner of the roof, and the other on the western roof. The building sits on a brick foundation and is covered with asphalt shingles on the roof. William R. Millar was a Lewiston, Maine architect with a statewide practice who ?specialized in schools, libraries, hotels, and other structures intended for public use.? His architectural style tended towards the ?amboyant and included Shingle Style hotels, Romanesque Libraries and Colonial Revival homes. The Administration building at the Maine Industrial School for Girls is one of his more restrained commissions, however, his passion for rich detail is evident in his use of quoins, keystone lintels, dental mouldings and the striking colonnaded porch. The building was originally used as the headquarters for the business administration Of the school, and the principal?s residence. Currently the building is home to the Maine State Department of Conservation. 4. Central Building, 1917-1919 Architect: W.G. Bunker, Augusta Contractor: unknown At the time it was built, the Central Building became the, largest structure on the Maine Industrial School for Girls campus. As with Erskine and Baker Halls, it is two-and-a-half stories tall, with a raised basement, symmetrical facade with forward facing central projection, granite belt courses, and an asphalt hipped roof. Unlike the previous brick buildings, the Central Building was designed in a somewhat less detailed Colonial Revival style that came to characterize academic buildings throughout the nation in the first decades of the twentieth century. The west facing facade is comprised of a seven bay projecting pavilion ?anked by two recessed four bay wings. With the exception of some of the three?over?three basement windows on'the wings, the majority of the windows on the building have been replaced overtime; currently there is an assortment of modern six-over?six sash and decorative windows throughout the structure. A large arched window anchors either side of the projecting center section, however the sash currently installed in these portals do not fill the arches. The most outstanding feature of the Central Building is the concrete portico at the center of the building. Two rectangular, concrete pilasters line either side of the brick arched doorway; directly west of the pilasters are two concrete Doric columns which support a plain, but massive concrete entablature with overhanging wooden cornice. A small iron balustrade completes the portico. Similarly, NPS FORM 10-900-a OMB Approval No. 1024-0018 (8-86) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet MNE INDUSTRIAL SCHOOL FOR GIRLS HISTORIC DISTRICT KENNEBEC CO., MAINE Section number 7 Page 5 concrete entablature, mounted above engaged brick piers, are located above additional entrances on the . north and south ends of the building. The Central Building has been extensively renovated on the interior in order to house the Maine State Department of Labor. 5. Stevens Building, 1936-38 Architect: Bunker and Savage, Augusta Contractor: unknown The east facing Stevens Building is the structure most responsible for giving the Maine Industrial School for Girls the look and feel of an institutional campus. The positioning of the building helped create the common space at the center of the campus. This large, symmetrical, hip roof building is 19 bays wide on its facade, which is articulated into a center projecting cross gabled pavilion ?anked by a five bay main section to the north and south, which further returns into a three bay wings at each of the buildings ends. Drawing on Colonial Revival and Classical Revival styles, the central pavilion includes a two story blind arch reaching from the granite string course to under the gable peak; inserted within this brick arch is a three part, arched and segmented window. Directly below the window is a concrete portico strikingly similar to that found on the Central building. Cornice return and brick quoins further accentuate the center of this building. An octagonal?wooden cupola is perched on the middle of the ridge. Four louvered arches face in the Cardinal directions; the flared roof and spire are constructed out of COpper. Three symmetrically placed dormers and two chimneys punctuate the rear roof of the Stevens building. This building is currently used by the Maine State Department of Corrections as a Pre?Release Center. Non-Contributing Structures 8.. Modern three-car garage located to north of the administration building. b. A small concrete-block utility'house on west side of Stevens building. 0.. A small concrete block utility house, built into ground, on south east side of Stevens building. MAINE INDUSTRIAL SCHOOL FOR GIRLS HISTORIC DISTRICT Name of Property 8. Statement of Significance A plicable National Register Criteria ark in one or more boxes for the criteria qualifying the property for National Register listing.) a A Property is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history. Property is associated with the lives of persons significant in our past. Property embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values, or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components lack individual distinction. l] Property has yielded, or is likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. Criteria Considerations (Mark in all the boxes that apply.) Property is: El A owned by a religious institution or used for religious purposes. removed from its original location. a or a grave. El a cemetery. El a reconstructed building, object, or structure. El a commemorative prOperty. El less than 50 years of age or achieved signi?cance within the past 50 years. Narrative Statement of Significance (Explain the signi?cance of the property on one or more continuation sheets.) 9. Major Bibliographical References Bibliography KENNEBEC C0.. MAINE Wnty and State Areas of Significance (Enter categories from instructions) EDUCATION SOCIAL HISTORY ARCHITECTURE Period of Significance 1898 - 1938 Significant Dates 1898 1901-1902 1905-06 "53 1917-1919, 1936-1938 Significant Person (Complete if Criterion is marked above) Cultural Affiliation Architect/Builder Varies: see description (Cite the books. articles, and other sources used in preparing this form on one or more continuation-sheets.) Previous documentation on file (NPS): l] preliminary determination of individual listing (36 CFR 67) has been requested previously listed in the National Register previously determined eligible by the National Register designated a National Historic Landmark re#corded by Historic American Buildings Survey CI EICICICI recorded by Historic American Engineering Record Primary location of additional data: a State Historic Preservation Of?ce Other State agency Federal agency El Local government University El Other Name of repository: Maine State Archives. Augusta. Maine NPS FORM 10-900-3 OMB Approval No. 1024-0018 (3'86) United States Department of the interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet MAINE INDUSTRIAL SCHOOL FOR GIRLS HISTORIC DISTRICT KENNEBEC co.. MAINE Section number 8 Page 2 The Maine Industrial School for Girls was founded in 1874 by the State of Maine as a place where wayward girls, who were considered a danger to themselves or a threat to society, could be safely housed and given a moral, social and academic education. Prompted by an incident in 1867 in which a teen-age girl was arrested, convicted and jailed for petty larceny, it took seven years and a petition signed by ?a thousand ladies of Portland" before the funding and legislation was in place ?to make like provisions for the reform of girls as had been made for boys?. (Board of Trustees and Officers, 1903, p. 5.) Initially, the school was run by a board of trustees appointed by the Governor, until 1899, when all of the management and control of the school was transferred to the State. Over the years the mission of the school evolved from that of an educational facility to that of a disciplinary, or reform institution, before closing in the early 19703. The Maine industrial School for Girls Historic District is being nominated to the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion A in recognition of the signi?cant role it played in the education and reform of the State's young and misguided girls . The Maine industrial School for Girls was not the ?rst such institution in the United States. By the time the first building was constructed at least three other similar institutions had been developed: the Lancaster industrial School for Girls in Lancaster, Massachusetts (1854), the Connecticut Industrial School for Girls (1872?1914), and the Philadelphia House of Refuge. The plight of homeless families and ?stubborn' girls was emerging as yet another ramification of industrialization, along with the separation of families, the arrival of large numbers of immigrants and the overcrowding of cities. in the rural sections of Maine unsteady economic and agricultural cycles impoverished and separated families. Reformers in general, and women's rights reformers in particular, added to their list of concerns the potential threats to the morality, chastity and purity of endangered American girls. Accordingly, in the words of historian Pauline W. Moore: ?Nineteenth?century to the crises of urbanization, modernization, and immigration by seeking to create a web of institutions that would mediate between older values and the consequences of unchecked economic and technological change." (Moore, The Maine Industrial School for Girls was to succeed by taking girls between the ages of 7 and 18 out of dangerous environments, and shelter and educate them in a new model ?home? environment. This mode had already been tried, and deemed successful at the Lancaster Industrial School for Girls in Massachusetts. This was acknowledged in Governor Chamberlain's address to the Maine Legislature of 1872. "The results of these institutions, where they have been established, prove that many of these unfortunate persons can be rescued from the awful gulf that is opening before them, and fitted for lives of virtue and industry. Of three hundred and ten girls who have been discharged from the industrial School for Girls in Lancaster, Mass., in the last ten years, who characters are known, two hundred and sixty are living honestly and reputably. The current of the lives has been changed, NPS FORM 10-900-3 OMB Approval No. 1024-0018 (8-86) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet MAINE SCHOOL FOR GIRLS HISTORIC DISTRICT KENNEBEC co., MAINE Section number 8 Page 3 and, instead of being pests in society they have learned to support themselves respectably, and many of the them have charge of homes which they have learned, in the school, to make comfortable and happy. A large apprOpriation to. be expended in building is not required. The family system is undoubtedly the best. Buildings with sufficient grounds, that will accommodate from fifteen to twenty-?ve persons will be sufficient for the present, and others can be added as occasion may require.? (By-Laws and Statutes, p. 18-19.) The family system was determined to provide the girls a safe environment where they could experience" again the ?love of a family?, and learn to work as a family member in agricultural and domestic labor pursuits. The ?family? was comprised of the schools principal or matron, the resident teachers and the other students; all of whom were female. - Locating the school in the fresh air of the country, and away from the vice of the city, was deemed especially important, and the girls were to be housed in moderately sized cottages that would be more home-like than institutional. A similar philosophy was developing among the higher academic institutions at the same time. Smith College in Northampton, Massachusetts was also organized along the cottage approach, although the concern here was not to prevent the students from descending into vice, but to support their emotional and academic growth outside of their families. One of the important differences, however, was that the girls housed at the Maine industrial School for girls became wards of the state; the rights of their parents were legally terminated when a girl was committed. The first building constructed at the school was Flagg?Dummer Hall, a brick structure that had dining facilities, classrooms and a room for each girl located within the two story building. By 1886, a second, similar structure was built, as it became apparent that the number of needy girls was not going to dissipate on its own. In addition to overcrowding, the need for constant work on the grounds, including grading and planting, and on the water system and in the ?elds, made the first decades challenging. initially the school included a farm structure, an old barn, and a windmill as well. Repeated complaints from the administrators noted that because the grounds were not well fenced the girls kept escaping though Dummer woods to the north. By 1893 calls were made for the construction of yet a third structure, and in 1898 Joshua Thissel of Worcester, Massachusetts, was hired to provide plans for a new building, which was to include rooms for twenty-six girls, an apartment for the principal and the school's ?rst reception area. Oriented south towards WinthrOp Street, for a short time this building was the public face of the school. Within the next two years fires destroyed Erskine Hall and Flagg-Dummer Hall. The latter was rebuilt ir the foundation of the original structure, but when it came time to re?erect Erskine Hall, the location was shifted to the west, which ?puts all the buildings in better relations with each other and leaves the grounds in more suitable condition both for present use and future development" (Board of Trustees and Officers, 1903, p. 7.) Both Baker and Erskine Halls were designed by Thissel, and as such they resemble each other significantly in plan and style. The report of the Erskine Hall Building Committee describes the basis for this plan, as well as the detail of its execution. ?The plan of the new Erskine is that of Baker Hall, with modifications suggested by the experience NPS FORM 10-900-a OMB Approval No. 1024-0018 (5-35) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet MAINE INDUSTRIAL SCHOOL FOR GIRLS HISTORIC DISTRICT KENNEBEC co. MAINE Section number 8 Page 4 of your board and from that of the managers of the Girls? Industrial School at Lancaster, Massachusetts. It follows closely in design the latest building at that institution. lt accommodates twenty-six girls with a single room for each, with their teacher, matron and housekeeper, on the first and second ?oors, with spare rooms in the attic. It is well built of good materials, and we believe it to be one of the finest buildings of its kind in the country.? (Board of Trustees and Officer, 1903, p. 7.) - Over the next ten years porches and verandas were added to each of the buildings, as well as ?re escapes. A landscape architect from Boston, Shef?eld A. Arnold, was hired in 1907 to prepare a "Study for Arrangement of Drives and Plantings? for the school. This plan, which was never fully instituted, revolve: around the north-south drive, lining the road with trees, and installing beds and shrubs around each of the buildings. Each of the cottages was given a small, geometrically designed formal ?ower garden for the girls to tend, and a laundry yard was to be concealed by hedges at each house. in 1899 the management of the school was shifted from the semi-private Board of Trustee to the State of Maine. This marks a subtle shift in the nature of the facility. Although the Annual Report continued to state year after year that "The Maine Industrial School for Girls is not a house of correction, but is designed a refuge for girls between the ages of six and twenty-one (Board of Trustees and Of?cer, 1903, p. 6.), the school became increasingly less ?family? based and more institution. One of first manifestations of this was in the 1905 erection of the Administration Building. This new structure, which prOvided an apartment for the principal, reception rooms and administration of?ces, was a philosophical expansion of Baker Hall with one important difference: it was not designed to provide lodging-to the girls, except in emergency situations. For the ?rst time, a spatial and conceptual divide was created between the residents and the administration. Throughout the ?rst 30 years of the Stevens School the residents had held classes in the same buildings in which they worked, cooked, did laundry and slept. This too changed with the construction of the Central Building, constructed in 1917. ?The school work previously carried on in each cottage was transferred to the new Central Building where it was possible to grade the work and follow more closely the State of Maine curriculum. Sewing classes and physical education became a part of the program. Through the aid of the Community Service supervisor, Binet - Simon mental tests were given every girl and more transfers made to other institutions. This building also housed the central laundry, stock rooms, gymnasium, dental office and rooms for sixteen girls." (Stevens, 1939). in the first years of the school many of the students needs were met in Hallowell, including visits to the doctor or church services. After the turn of the twentieth century, facilities for these services were increasingly incorporated into school buildings or onto school grounds. After 1910 a small infirmary was NPS FORM 10-900-3 OMB Approval NO. 1024-0018 (8-86) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet MAINE INDUSTRIAL SCHOOL FOR GIRLS HISTORIC DISTRICT KENNEBEC CO.. MAINE Section number 8 Page 5 added to one of the cottages, but this proved grossly inadequate. Again, in 1936, the school expanded, this time adding its largest structure, Stevens Hall. Hailed by many, this contained the ?much needed and long hOped for hospital and infirmary? (Stevens, 1939). The structure included operating rooms, a 32 bed infirmary, isolation wards as well as additional classroom space and modern training facilities for the domestic arts. With the construction of this building, the Maine industrial School for Girls became more of a closed, and self-sufficient institution. At the same time, the creation of the green allowed for the installation of playing fields, and helped to foster in the girls an even larger sense of community. NPS FORM 1o-soo-a OMB Approval No. 102443018 (8-36) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet MAINE INDUSTRIAL SCHOOL FOR GIRLS HISTORIC DISTRICT KENNEBEC co., MAINE Section number 9 Page 2 BIBLIOGRAPHY Arnold, Sheffield A. "Study for Arrangement of Drives and Plantings.? Manuscript map on file at the Maine State Archives, Augusta, Maine. Benzel. Barbara M. Dauqhters of the State: A Social Portrait of the First Reform School for Girls in North America. 1856-1905. (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press), 1983. Bv?Laws and Statues for the Government and Requlation of the Maine Industrial School for Girls at Hallowell. (Augusta: Press of Sprague, Owen Nash), 1875. Horowitz, Helen Lefkowitz. Alma Mater. (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press), 1984. Stevens, Nellie French. ?Hallowell Woman?s Initiative Created State School for Girls?, in Kennebec Journal, (Augusta, Maine). February 8, 1939. "Twenty-Eight annual the Maine Industrial School for Girls at Hallowell for the Year Ending November 18, 1902." (Augusta, Maine: Kennebec Journal Print), 1903. MAINE INDUSTRIAL SCHOOL FOR GIRLS HISTORIC DISTRICT KENNEBEC 00., MAINE Name 0? Property County and State 10. Geographical Data Acreage of Property Approx. 5.72 acres UTM References (Place additional UTM references on a continuation sheet.) 1 534 67 31 436285 904 57 1l9I 4l316 4l I9 l I l?l I Isl Il Zone Easting Northing Zone Easting Northing See continuation sheet Verbal Boundary Description (Describe the boundaries of the property-on a continuation sheet.) Boundary Justification (Explain why the boundaries were selected on a continuation sheet.) 11. Form Prepared By 7 - name/title CHRISTI A. MITCHELL. ARCHITECTURAL HISTORIAN organization MAINE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION date 23 January 2003 street 8: number 55 CAPITOL STREET, STATION 65 telephone (207) 287?2132 city or town AUGUSTA state ME zip code 04333 -0065 Additional Documentation Submit the following items with the completed form: Continuation Sheets Maps A USGS map (7.5 or 15 minute series) indicating the property's location. A Sketch map for historic districts and properties having large acreage or numerous resources. Photographs Representative black and white photographs of the property. Additional items (Check with the SHPO or FPO for any additional items) Property Owner (Complete this item at the request of SHPO or FPO.) name street number telephone city or town state zip code Paperwork Reduction Act Statement: This information is being collected for applications to the National Register of Historic Places to nominate properties for listing or determine eligibility for listing. to list properties, and to amend existing listings. Response to this request is required to obtain a bene?t in accordance with the National Historic Preservation Act. as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.) Estimated Burden Statement: Public reporting burden for this form is estimated to average 18.1 hours per response including time for reviewing instructions, gathering and maintaining data, and completing and reviewing the form. Direct comments regarding this burden estimate or any aspect of this form to the Chief. Administrative Services Division, National Park Service, PO. Box 37127, Washington. DC 20013?7127; and the Of?ce of Management and Budget. Paperwork Reductions Project (1024?0018), Washington. DC 20503. NPS FORM 10'900?3 OMB Approval NO. 1024-0018 (8-86) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet MAINE INDUSTRIAL SCHOOL FOR GIRLS HISTORIC DISTRICT KENNEBEC co? MAINE Section number 10 Page 2 VERBAL BOUNDARY DESCRIPTION Beginning at a point described by UTM coordinates 19 0436453 east 19 4904467 north the nominated boundary proceeds 863' at 191 degrees to the second boundary point, then proceeds 603 feet at 321 degrees to the third boundary point, then proceeds 452 feet at 12 degrees to the fourth boundary point before returning to the initial boundary point as described above. This boundary has also been indicated on the accompanying sketch map ?Maine Industrial School for Girls Historic District?. BOUNDARY JUSTIFICATION The nominated boundary encompasses all the land and landscaping immediately adjacent to the ?ve contributing buildings and one contributing site. The boundary has been drawn to exclude the non-historic structures on the campus. NPS FORM 10-9004! (8-86) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet MAINE INDUSTRIAL SCHOOI. FOR GIRLS HISTORIC DISTRICT Section number Page 0MB Approval No. 1024-0018 KENNEBEC CO.I MAINE PHOTOGRAPHS Photograph 1 of 5 Christi A. Mitchell Maine Historic Preservation Commission 23 January 2003 Administration Building, southeast facade; facing northwest. Photograph 2 of 5 Christi A. Mitchell Maine Historic PreserVation Commission 23 January 2003 Baker Building; south facade; facing north. Photograph 3 of 5 Christi A. Mitchell Maine Historic Preservation Commission 23 January 2003 Erskine Hall (on left), Central Building (on right); facing north. Photograph 4 of 5 Christi A. Mitchell Maine Historic Preservation Commission 23 January 2003 Erskine Hall, facing northeast. Photograph 5 of 5 Christi A. Mitchell Maine Historic Preservation Commission 23 January 2003 Stevens Building and common; facing west. HALLOWELL, KENNEBEC (30., MAINE BASED ON HALLOWELLTAX MAP 6 MAINE INDUSTRIAL SCHOOL FOR DISTRICT ?w .3 a. a; a BASED HALLOWELL TAX MAP 6 CCOHMNN MAINE SCHOOL FOR elm?S HALLOWELL, KENNEBE r: PHDTOQEAPHS APme MATE aowmwr n. . ., 5? ran-:3 .. ?1 nun-0". :9 i 4- Q. 33 . 15.2? 5533.3? gr no? 05.5 350.50 935.3 .ovm . . . gin 50:35.: 3.60.. 1.3.55 no; In, 91 MAINE moon-um. mt. aces-s Damn? nauuem co- 2 M: 3 or Slim .tocmdr)r not: 3.?qu 99.5.5.1? 00.. In. A. on m. UNIS .. . (I. Amman? a 327.0 ?on! 0.95 Ewan-.0 in. m;