Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Construction topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Chicopee advances Berry School feasibility study; MSBA process, wetlands and Article 97 protections add complexity
Summary
Architects and city staff told the School Committee the Berry Elementary project is in an MSBA feasibility stage and that wetlands, a state Article 97 parkland designation and a water easement narrow buildable options; the district will submit study reports this spring and summer as it evaluates three alternate sites.
The Chicopee School Committee heard a detailed update on the Berry Elementary feasibility study during its Feb. 19 regular meeting, with project architect Bert Gardner outlining next steps in the Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) process and identifying site constraints that could affect whether the city rebuilds, renovates or adds onto the existing school.
Gardner, a principal with Caleb and Benick Architects, told the committee the project is in MSBA Module 3 (the feasibility study). He said the team must prepare a preliminary design program and a preferred schematic report that will show the recommended option — base repair, add/reno or new construction — and that the MSBA will use those documents to determine its funding share.
The preferred-schematic phase and MSBA approval will determine whether the city proceeds into schematic design and later construction. Gardner said the overall schedule is typically a four‑ to five‑year process from feasibility to finished building; the team expects to submit the preliminary design program in May and the preferred schematic report later this year.
Why it matters: the Berry site — Garrity Grove Park and the school — includes parkland that is protected under Article 97 of the Massachusetts Constitution. Gardner said that designation means any development that converts parkland would require a formal Article 97 process and likely a legislative approval, and that existing park amenities (tennis courts, playgrounds, a splash pad) would need to be replicated on-site or elsewhere.
Gardner reviewed three candidate sites the team is studying: the existing Berry/Garrity Grove Park footprint, the Sotelo (Zotelo) Park/Tele early childhood site, and a parcel at 0 Robins Road in the Chicopee Falls business park. He described pros and cons for each: the existing site is familiar to the community and relatively flat but contains wetlands and a water easement and triggers the Article 97 requirements; Sotelo Park is not Article 97 protected but places a new school behind an older building and may shift the student catchment; Robins Road is farther afield, may require land purchase, and has recorded wetlands and parcel geometry that complicate placement of a building.
Gardner said wetlands on the Berry site impose a 30‑foot no‑build zone and larger buffers that substantially limit where a foundation could be placed, pushing any new building toward the Peter Street side of the site. He also said title-certificate language needs clarification and that city solicitors are helping to ensure the feasibility report clearly shows city control of the parcels.
MSBA funding and local cost: Gardner said MSBA reimbursement percentages can approach about 80% for eligible costs; nonreimbursable elements (for example, costs to replicate park amenities required under Article 97) would fall to the city. He noted the MSBA process requires an alternatives analysis that demonstrates other sites have been considered.
What’s next: the team will finalize the preliminary design program and preferred-schematic work, with presentation to MSBA anticipated before schematic design. Gardner said the MSBA will later set a project funding agreement that defines the authority’s share and the city’s responsibility.
