The URL can be used to link to this page

65 WASHINGTON STREET- (DISTRICT COURT) 65 Washington Street District Court Approved Schematic Design r Salem ® Redevelopment Authority Salem Redevelopment Authority Proposal August 9, 2017 65 Washington Street "Salem District Court" (Diamond Sinacori, LLC and Urban Spaces, LLC): Continued discussion and vote on schematic design review for proposed development project. SRA Decision At its meeting on August 9, 2017 the Salem Redevelopment Authority voted to approve the schematic design for the proposed development project at 65 Washington Street "Salem District Court." Recommendation At its meeting on July 26, 2017 the Design Review Board voted to recommend approval of the schematic design for 65 Washington Street "Salem District Court" (Diamond Sinacori, LLC and Urban Spaces, LLC). Proposal The enclosed submission from the applicant is a plan set that incorporates comments from the DRB that were provided at its meetings on January 25th, June 28`h, and July 6th. The building is six stories rising 69 feet high. The total unit count now stands at 61 (10% will be deed restricted affordable), with 61 onsite parking spaces, and additional six tandem spots (21 parking lifts/stackers are being considered). Storage for 30 bicycles will also be provided. The amount of proposed commercial space on the ground floor has been reduced from 3,000 sf (what it was in January) to 2,810 sf. It is still proposed to be located at the corner of Church and Washington Street. The ground floor elevation at Federal Street will contain parking on the other side of the wall. Staff Comments —June 28, 2017 DRB Meeting There has been much internal discussion (with the developer) about improving the ground floor Federal Street elevation. It's challenged, given the need for parking in that location. The applicant is making efforts to provide robust landscaping, street trees, and street furniture. We are also working with the City's Public Art Planner, Montserrat College of Art President Steve Immerman, and a public art consultant retained by the applicant, on ways that public art could potentially improve the visual appeal of that elevation. Any public art option will require a great deal of thought and time to develop; therefore we do not anticipate that the applicant will show the public art (during the schematic design review phase) at this time. We ask that the DRB work with the ,d Salem ® Redevelopment Authority applicant on further improvement to this elevation with the understanding that public art will most likely play a role there. Proposal — January 25, 2017 In September of 2015 the applicant was selected by the SRA to redevelop the District Court property at 65 Washington Street. The original proposal that earned the selection called for 61 condominium units with 8,400 square feet of retail on the ground floor, and 82 parking spaces (many underground). The applicant has since changed architects and has revised its design. The proposal calls for a six story building with between 62-64 condominium units, parking spaces located one floor below grade and enclosed at grade, and a terrace at the rear of the building on the second floor. The project also calls for 3,000 square feet of subdividable retail space to be located at the corner of Church and Washington Street, with frontage continuing down Church Street. Enclosed for your review are a cover letter (it is tucked further into the packet), a property survey, rendered perspectives and elevations, a locus map with photos of existing/surrounding context, and floor plans. Staff Comments —January 25, 2017 This project was presented to the SRA on January 11, 2017, where it was approved to move on to the DRB for review of schematic design. 65 Washington Street - Program Summary ISE DESIGN ASSOCIATES YFJMAY WN/.CFLEM Site Area: 22,440 S.F. Building Area (Enclosed): 81,153 S.F. Building Area (w/ Parking): 100,115 S.F. Retail Area: 2810 S.F. (Incl. in Above) ' Height: 69 Ft. Tvpe/Number - Dwellina Units • One Bedroom 8 • One Bedroom w/ Study 5 • Two Bedroom 38 _ [IN • Three Bedroom 10 r s i ANEW Total 61 Ly Tvpe/Number - Parkins Spaces — • Compact (7.5) 22 • Intermediate (8) 5 rw • Full Size (8.5) 34 (2 HP) ' • Tandem 6 • Lifts (Optional) 21 (Potential) f ! '_ r_' �6, J�t Total 88 t Tvpe/Number - Bicvcle Storaae • Wall Mounted - Secure 30 Urban Spaces, LLC Diamond Sinacori, LLC TISE DESIGN ASSOCIATES $lIF PuW NIHG -\\ PRIX'RNA MwNAGEMEM RAIJV _l � ' y °-i m TORAGE Z =fJ Z c a m 21F 22T 31T 33T 34T Q fi U 27T 29T J 1 23F N W 5C 24F 3 d 32F 34F 35F Tn C, r 25F 26F 28F 30F I ai YI m I � I w Z) a AMP ABOVE Z a J a z 1-- LOWER LEVEL METERS PECK ABOVE W < P�jJjJ(ING / Ijf W_ C PACT SPACES — 7.5 X i6 =19 \4/ FULL SIZE SPACES — 8.5 X 18 =11 i TA14DEM — 8.5 X 18 - e R�^,fdf' ",BONG MET[fja 20C i m fO s TOTAL SPACES 36 SPACES D UNEXC4vE1'LE 8 C 9 C IOC 11 C 12C 13C 14C 15C 15C 17C 18C 19C DIUWINO MO. SCALE: DATE:YY20 17 33 FEDERAL ST rRANSFORMLR TISE DESIGN i ASSOCIATES 7---1BUILDING ABO RAMP D q ROLLING DOOR +0 ,-- - - -- A47 . A Y/ PLANTER ,1 u •.°z 35F - u O 50I 511 521 53. 541 551 � W Z 32 CHURCH ST LnZ +LLJ 7( A `O v O VB,KES - _ r-PLAY w w C i �/ V w 38F V Z 01- Q U 'BENCHES— ART PANELS 139F BUILDING ABOVE N U) — �T�- a W a Q 4 40F 49C I J- Y/ Q Z t o LLJU W � N < cc W 41G - 56� 51( 55( (AV WF 5'T QF 631- 64F 65- 'o 43( O o 'I -r —AR1 PANELS Q 44F Cate-gun LEVEL O PACKAGE I LL U -we, SPACES - 7.5 X 16 -3 45( CONCIERGE= INTERMEDIATE - 8 X 18 - 5 Z 2 FULL SIZE SPACES - 8.5 X 18 •Ql ip� � DISABLED - 2 _ _..... S TOTAL SPACES 31 SPACES, LL^ C) «Ake w lJ RETAIL: 7,810eµ1L e 13 +�- �OIUWIMO MO. WASHINGTON STREET DAM DATE.`✓1.bO �--- --'-- TISE DESIGN ASSOCIATES ! Imo - - u 32 CHURCH ST. C W Z = O � Q O ~ f Kam- � ice_ i _ _ —_-•_. a iN CC LU J a a m LOUNUA19RARY � TRaSli - -- W " D _ a � ( 1 L Z i� I Eli - a Oa I-'- L 0 U LL OPEN TO - - 0 Q BELOW r Z I6iO U } V) V) D DMAWING MO. TSE DESIGN ASSOCIATES ,.E"LLAl EII P.&:N ING PLO.MANAG1M117 U I —2x6 WALLS J 28'-0" SPAN 5'-E" 28'-0" SPAN ca J 6 ------ --------- t O -- ��---- {u U a GO I ENGINEERED WOOD FLOOR ES z _ .. -- . .__. to 5 WOOD DECKING _—_—_—_—_—_—_—_—_— 0 Z 00 8'-0" DROPPED CEILING II^^ a_ 1 ZV Oo J J —_�-�_—_— _—_—_—_— _—_—_—_— N LLI Q Wa `a00 9'-0' CEILING DESIRED 3 IL 0 3Do — --�— --- -—-—-—-—-— -—-—-—-—-— c u � r � a i a O _ DECK o Z I -- :r Z � O I D RETAIL PARKING — — W 0 —1— GRADE Ld a I f o EW SLAB PARKING DRAWING NO. G? EW FOOTING SCALL'.': TO SCALE DATIF 12017 Previous Design from 6/28/17 'SE 01 5143141 ASSOCIATES Review design of current building cornice and roof overhang T" E- 1 Review color of awnings in contract with main building color pallet. � l _l _ Consider more The building needs mile le �"� lazing and more betterconnec- -11 1_' isible entrances ion with the street �' �' ® � For the commercial tenant section w�.�wOW11,IM1111xrw _ ,T7T � - — -- - � ..tea � • he lrudillonal building base design sPPma at building should #�,• }` •Y, odds with the more contemporary main body have a better, more pedestrian ty of the building. Consider additional options in- _ �� olving color and materials connection to t t.4 he street. \ A' o,4 s . m ME DESIGN NSSOLU\iES -imm Sir- Ilk ...f _. e 1 rill ,_. _ MEN IMMUNE SOONER ■i r - ow-M SENSE IMME moms � a � " 11 - A �� -ram '# 1 ✓I , R•url e.ubr.bmemn e..a• - - R __�'_ yens �. " -x 4. • -� a - . . s 51 FL f e TDA if itNMI 11 - - 11 II 1M1 1!W-II ■MI ■ ice. : - p IN1=0 NMI � . I�1 11 11 11 ■11� I�. i it � �11■ 11 - 11 I1�1 �� OVA '�►• w. I �-' v Previous Design from 6/28/17 "q N �� T8E�81GN �OCIA�EB 4 ram . - r- x C r WHO lw mom 1 040 Y AL fILLµI1IIII+tII 4IIIIIIIIIIIII'I{� ..i'f I i T � .yam., 1)tE O01fiM �" �ltOCMT® < s _ � � Lr n 1s s. 11 TDA ■1 mom 0 - ' •.. amNa . �� = , a �1 Irl II II I �i -11 now— II II I rl Ir �7 11 11 �i �'3eta. _ v.`.aY vpl"•'.� �u4� - � ' A M I _ Ifii IN i 'g550C1ATE5 i ad 4v Ole e - i r e r , �•. 1 �[ �` ry ` as `� . — ,11bOCl.,d ftdk _III on ' • F Or KIM _fir- or ,, iK aye, Aol R- .1 a 4 T�� NbCN19 i v!giJR' a.n Alr Y �1 *tX7 i , Ret YI h .ram 4 •+� c.0 Y-_ r p � 1 ITDA • ./r iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiilil • T f ' I � — auk i low ` J . � owl S 4k% .'' JAr r x 4 ¢<, -Ai �TI� 1� • r s nse oeslcry HS90CIHTE4 � r• � e "Ail � WW 1 i 1 l r _ r �� r r >.�.�Y� �� w♦ � .-�a �#�? si 's. ri: aiz.�p �� k:r� • ' it I a- 14. AM On �v•\Y ' h 1I 1 i { Y a �r T� I � '•.fay - i4 -f �w•. C, ( v f S : ►xefo! *, ? €_r-: .d 11 is ar a. C FI k . G�ar�}} f�a `1- `a>f ay �- J �(MM pd !fill ® �r� � )■ ■ �� no �� ' �' C ■ � � f oilale Previous Design • m 6/28/17 TISE SIGN e ww . .R I r ' 1 r 1 � � � � � O 1 � � � � � � :�11 li li➢:^ I i 3� «•sr ♦ b g�� _ . AA I fE + # :L %MOIL X. Yti rr WE 1 �i!� ■ _ _ yt_ Li, •fr �g�«� t e. ItI11 1i . 1 ! t f s �' :S `i �i � 1..- ,• � ; �„4.,- >!, f_ � ot ask- _ — -1ka s a ♦� d a :� k WALL RECESS WITH GROW SCREEN Public Space ' L1GM( tlG-:i L1GNi WN( GARDEN'A' GARDEN'S' GAKDEN'C' (PRIVATE) (PRIVATE) -. ^-7 (PRIVATE) PARKING AGE55 - IL PUBLIC SEATI NG I E' COMM AREA#1 G PUBLIC SEATING AREA#2 I I I I PUBLIC SIDEWALK PLANTING BUFFEWPUBLIC' PLAN VIGNETTE GARDEN FENCE WALL RECESS WITH GROW SCREEN BRICK REVEAL DETAIL PRIVATE PARKING GARDEN'A' PUBLIC SEATING GARDEN'S' PUBLIC 5EATING GARDEN'C' CORNER ACESS (PRIVATE) AREA#1 (PRIVATE) AREA#2 (PRIVATE) 'ART ELEVATION VIGNETTE 5CALE:1/4"=1'-O" Lmr ss,20 a aL "I lu 1 31 lu i 1 11� �� !�i� I) �-li��l It _ BUILDING MASSING P is a � 22. K a� �� sicc sr�wes V"Apr- 771AW Re: 65 Washington St Schematic Design To the Design Review Board: Designing a building that fosters an inviting pedestrian environment at the street level is key to the effort to demolish and replace the District Courthouse, and was emphatically part of City of Salem's Request for Proposal for the project. It is a directive of the Heritage East Urban Renewal Plan that planning should underscore this goal. When the SRA was created, John Collins emphasized the urban renewal plan would enhance "Salem's organic street pattern, ambitious pedestrian greenway network and historical landmarks..." From The Urban Design Concept by John Collins, published in Urban Design International, vol. 2, no. 1, November/December 1980. Diamond Sinacori's schematic design for a building with parking on the ground floor must meet this condition by enhancing the pedestrian environment on Washington St., Federal Street and Church St. One solution is to require the developer to create space on the first floor for restaurants or cafes, as the City did in developing the South Harbor Garage. Scratch Kitchen, now occupying the first floor of the South Harbor Garage, makes a lively addition to Salem's restaurant scene and anchors the Congress/Derby St. intersection where pedestrian elements are absent from the other corners. At a minimum, the proposed development should not be approved absent a design that includes 1,000 sf or restaurant or retail space on the building's Washington St fagade. Sidewalk width is another key issue,particularly given the height of this development. Fifteen to 20 feet of sidewalk setback is required to ensure the sidewalk is wide enough to accommodate flow traffic into downtown, seated caf6 patrons and people entering the condo building. This setback is consistent with other new developments in downtown, including 135 Lafayette and the newly approved RCG hotel/residential complex on lower Washington St. For the 65 Washington St project,the DRB should mandate shade and rain canopies on Washington St that are continguous and uninterrupted, and the same on Federal and Church St. sidewalks. Finally, every new residential complex must provide bicycle racks for residents that are protected from the rain. These can be inside the first-floor garage or under a canopy. Thank you for considering these comments. Nina Cohen 22 Chestnut Street, Salem Andrew Shapiro From: vtsdmailer@vt-s.net on behalf of Contact form at City of Salem MA <vtsdmailer@vt- s.net> Sent: Wednesday,July 26, 2017 5:28 PM To: Andrew Shapiro Subject: [City of Salem MAj 65 Washington St. (Sent by Stan Franzeen, stanzeen@comcast.net) Hello ashapiro, Stan Franzeen (stanzeenftcomcast.net) has sent you a message via your contact form (htto://www.salem.com/user/316/contact) at City of Salem MA. If you don't want to receive such e-mails,you can change your settings at htto:[/www.salem.com/user/316/edit. Message: Dear Mr. Shapiro: I am writing to submit my comments for the record in re to the 65 Washington St.design. I have had only a cursory chance to view the initial schematic, but it seems to be inconsistent with the character of our city. I believe the building should be far less obtrusive and overpowering of the adjacent buildings and the historic Tabernacle Church.To that end, I hope the final design: 1) reduces in height both the left and right sections facing Wash.St.,visually dividing the bldg into 3 connected sections; 2) replaces the flat roof with three pitched roofs over each of the three sections; 3) includes solar panels and all forms of energy conservation measures. I will be unable to attend tonight's meeting, but I hope you share this email with your colleagues. Thank you. Stan Franzeen 34 Daniels Street Salem t Andrew Shapiro From: vtsdmailer@vt-s.net on behalf of Contact form at City of Salem MA <vtsdmailer@vt- s.net> Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 8:53 PM To: Andrew Shapiro Subject: [City of Salem MA] 65 Washington St. "Salem District Court" Building (Sent by Patricia H Donahue, phdonahue@verizon.net) Hello ashapiro, Patricia H Donahue (ohdonahueRverizon.net) has sent you a message via your contact form (htto://www.salem.com/user/316/contact) at City of Salem MA. If you don't want to receive such e-mails,you can change your settings at htto://www.salem.com/user/316/edit. Message: I am a life-long resident of Salem and very much love and appreciate Salem's historic and traditional architecture.The proposed design does not reflect Salem's historic architecture in any way.The design shows a mammoth block of brick, so bland and unappealing. It ruins the streetscape of Federa[,Washington and Church. It belongs in Boston,not in Salem. We are doing a disservice to Salem if we allow this type of architecture to blight our downtown. It is overpowering and simply out of place. It does nothing for our historic city. Please consider these comments. Thank you,Pat Donahue 1 Andrew Shapiro From: vtsdmailer@vt-s.net on behalf of Contact form at City of Salem MA <vtsdmailer@vt- s.net> Sent: Wednesday,July 26, 2017 8:34 AM To: Andrew Shapiro Subject: [City of Salem MAj 65 Washington Street a.k.a. "Salem District Court" (Sent by Steven B Caron,tyringham@hotmail.com) Hello ashapiro, Steven B Caron (tvrinahamPhotmail.com) has sent you a message via your contact form (httr)://www.salem.com/user/316/contact) at City of Salem MA. If you don't want to receive such e-mails, you can change your settings at htto://www.salem.com/user/316/edit. Message: 65 Washington Street a.k.a. "Salem District Court" Building project is not attractive and not in keeping with the architecture of the surrounding buildings. I strongly oppose this design and would ask for a building that is evocative of Salem's history and esthetics. 1 Andrew Shapiro From: vtsdmailer@vt-s.net on behalf of Contact form at City of Salem MA <vtsdmailer@vt- s.net> Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2017 8:37 AM To: Andrew Shapiro Subject: [City of Salem MA] District Court Proposal, Diamond Sinacori3One More (Sent by Deborah Prentice, prenticed45@yahoo.com) Attachments: district_ct_ds_rfp.jpg Hello ashapiro, Deborah Prentice(r)renticed45Pvahoo.com) has sent you a message via your contact form (htto://www.salem.com/user/316/contact) at City of Salem MA. If you don't want to receive such e-mails, you can change your settings at htto://www.salem.com/user/316/edit. Message: Also sent to the mayor and council... ----------------- Classic bait and switch!!! When is this city going to put its foot down on developer shenanigans??? Now is the perfect time, with the market the way it is. I'm/we're begging you! Also pls see this blog. Stellar. htt os://streetsofsa le m.co m/2017/02/02/develo oe r-d rive n-desien/ 1 Andrew Shapiro From: vtsdmailer@vt-s.net on behalf of Contact form at City of Salem MA <vtsdmailer@vt- s.net> Sent: Wednesday,July 26, 2017 8:05 AM To: Andrew Shapiro Subject: [City of Salem MA] salem district court redevelopment project(Sent by donna burham, dj b48_2000@yahoo.com) Hello ashapiro, donna burham (dib48 2000CeDvahoo.com) has sent you a message via your contact form (htto://www.salem.com/user/316/contact)at City of Salem MA. If you don't want to receive such e-mails, you can change your settings at htto://www.salem.com/user/316/edit. Message: The pictures were just posted on the Salem Common Neighborhood Association facebook page. My opinion? this is too big, and frankly,just hideous. It's just too big, does not conform with the architecture in that area. It doesn't even pretend to fit in. Just awful. Just my opinion. Sincerely, Donna Burham Pickman Street Salem t Andrew Shapiro From: Deb Prentice <prenticed45@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday,July 27, 2017 8:17 PM To: Andrew Shapiro Cc: Tom Daniel Subject: Re: [City of Salem MA] Historic Buildings/New Design (Sent by Deborah Prentice, prenticed45 @yahoo.com) Thank you both for the update. What a pity, though... Brings tears to my eyes to think of that horror in the midst of downtown. I was delighted to find this blog a while back. Nailed it. Developer-driven Desian I sent the below in via salem.com. Good design is not that complicated. Maybe we're approving cheap design. Again, why??? It's plain to see that this developer is looking to cut corners, and to whit, the grilling that they were given by city council, Famico in particular. Big promises, total revamp. It should have been sent back out for RFP. Thanks again for your prompt responses. Deb Developer-driven Design Preservation Brief 14: New Exterior Additions to Historic Buildings: Preservation Concerns t Preservation Brief 14: New Exterior Additions to Historic Buildings: Preservation Concerns From: Andrew Shapiro <AShaoiro(a)Salem.com> To: "orenticed45(aDvahoo.com" <orenticed45(cDvahoo.com> Cc: Tom Daniel <tdaniel(a)Salem.com> Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2017 11:07 AM Subject: Re: [City of Salem MA] Historic Buildings/New Design (Sent by Deborah Prentice, Drenticed45(a)vahoo.ccm) Deb - I was not at the meeting last night as I'm out this week on vacation. Tom Daniel, who is the Director of Planning and Community development was in attendance and is copied on this email. My understanding is that the DRB voted to recommend approval of the schematic design to the SR.A. The SRA will take up the matter on August 9th. Thank you, Andrew Sent from my iPhone > On Jul 27, 2017, at 11:00 AM, Contact form at City of Salem MA <vtsd mailer(riM-s.net> wrote: > Hello ashapiro, > Deborah Prentice (Drenticed45nvahoo.com) has sent you a message via your > contact form (httiD://www.salem.com/user/316/contact) at City of Salem MA. > If you don't want to receive such e-mails, you can change your settings at > httiD://www.salem.com/user/316/edit. > Message: > One more, Mr. Shapirc. This was posted to HDSNA. Nice catch! > Design Guidance: > Compatible New Additions to Historic Buildings > httos://www.nos.gov/ti)s/how-to-preserve/briefs/14-exterior-additions.htm > I'm trying to find out what happened with the Diamond Sinacori proposal. If > you have a minute to advise, it would be much appreciated. > Thanks, and thanks for your prompt responses, also. 2 Eq SRA/DRB Submissions (Prior to Schematic Design Approval) eSalem Redevelopment Authority building on the second floor. The project also calls for 3,000 square feet of subdividable retail space to be located at the corner of Church and Washington Street, with frontage continuing down Church Street. Enclosed for your review are a cover letter (it is tucked further into the packet), a property survey, rendered perspectives and elevations, a locus map with photos of existing/surrounding context, and floor plans. Staff Comments — January 25, 2017 This project was presented to the SRA on January 11, 2017, where it was approved to move on to the DRB for review of schematic design. Salem Redevelopment Authority Design Review Board Proposal July 26, 2017 65 Washington Street "Salem District Court" (Diamond Sinacori, LLC and Urban Spaces, LLC): Continued discussion and vote on schematic design review for proposed development project. Proposal — Updated for July 26, 2017 The enclosed submission from the applicant is a plan set that incorporates comments From the DRB that were provided at its meetings on January 25"' and June 28th. The total unit count now stands at 61, with 61 onsite parking spaces, and additional six tandem spots (21 parking lifts/stackers are being considered). Storage for 30 bicycles will also be provided. The amount of proposed commercial space on the ground floor has been reduced from 3,000 sf(what it was in January) to 2,810 sf. It is still proposed to be located at the corner of Church and Washington Street. The ground floor elevation at Federal Street will contain parking on the other side of the wall. Staff Comments There has been much internal discussion (with the developer) about improving the ground floor Federal Street elevation. It's challenged, given the need for parking in that location. The applicant is making efforts to provide robust landscaping, street trees, and street furniture. We are also working with the City's Public Art Planner, Montserrat College of Art President Steve Immerman, and a public art consultant retained by the applicant, on ways that public art could potentially improve the visual appeal of that elevation. Any public art option will require a grea` deal of thought and time to develop; therefore we do not anticipate that the applicant w II show the public art (during the schematic design review phase) at this time. We ask that the DRB work with the applicant on further improvement to this elevation with the understanding that public art will most likely play a role there. Proposal —January 25, 2017 In September of 2015 the applicant was selected by the SRA to redevelop the District Court property at 65 Washington Street. The orig nal proposal that earned the selection called for 61 condominium units with 8,400 square feet of retail on the ground floor, and 82 parking spaces (many underground). The applicant has since changed architects and has revised its design. The proposal calls for a six story building with between 62-64 condominium units, parking spaces located one floor below grade and enclosed at grade, and a terrace at the rear of the 1 TISE DESIGN I ASSOCIATES y ARCHITECTURE SITE BANNING ' N PROGRAM MANAGEMENT f i { 1 Jy+" T^ I I k �T _ • — ReuelFsublishmsm•1 �� _ _ l l r Sj r, 1 TISE DESIGN 1 ASSOCIATES [pow FM - 1 �g 7 1 � ® n� r -40 � J t 1 1 ' � 30 CHURCH ST. 33 FEDERAL ST. I � TRANSFORMER TISE DESIGN ' I ASSOCIATES F CHITECTURE PROGRAM MIWAGEGEMENT —BUILDI7ABOV�E I I I I RAMP D6WN \ I', �m ROLLING DOOR I , o � +0 U IN , PLANTEk I,.r 1 W r 0 W r ti 47 D 19 W Q t 501 511 521 531 541 551 ` Z 36F 32 CHURCH ST. w ;1 Z _ w 37F D 48D O v � a BIKES DISPLAY L IJ 38F "BENCHES ART PANELS oP _ J ' cLu o 39F BUILDING ABOVE _a O I ,II U Q V uJ Lo a W it -- It C3 II W V/ Q p l U m LL- 1' 41 F D'Ltd d 1 —PLANTEf w +2 6F 57F 58= SEF 60F 61 F 62F .3 64F 65F II o 42 F s I BENCHES ART PANELS I •,,I' I' 43 F '1�I i�wrle.�l•' ail Z + Q � a4F UP ' GROUND LEVEL 1' — PACKAGE PL 1j H PARKING CONCIERGE Q 18 COMPACT SPACES — X 16 =3 �I afi a5F INTERMEDIATE — 8 X 18 = 5 ' FULL SIZE SPACES — 8.5 X 18 =21 ILLJ DISABLED = 2 .I LOBBY 1' ~ U TOTAL SPACES 31 SPACE511 TRA. I z 1 (7 cn ' ART uEo w RETAIL 2,81 Osq.ft. \ PLANTER — -- _ — - - ' WASHINGTON STREET OA S02017 1 TISE DESIGN ' ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTURE SITED NNING PROGFPM MANAGEMENT I 1 U ' J ENE o < � yW 2 z = I ,gin a z 0 21F 22T 311 33T 34T 27T 29T 23F 2 2 aW <5 C ac 24F I, 32F 34F 35F _ 0 c ' C C 25F �IIG 26F 28F 30F Q w J m p F � ' / W U O RAMP ABOVE a Z ' Q J CL 1U LOWER LEVEL )ECK ABOVE W Q W P�1 RRKING H w W ' C�OIAPACT SPACES - 7.5 X 16 = 19 FULL SIZE SPACES - 8.5 X 18 =11 i 1n _ TANDEM - 8.5 X 18 = 6 RAMP ABOVE METER - - 20C ; Q U �L 44 m (n ' TOTAL SPACES 36 SPACES a UNEXCAVATED 8 C 9 C 10C 11 C 12C 13C 14C 15C 16C 17C 18C 19C DRAWING NO. IIIII III I I SCALESCALE: ' : ' 1 TISE DESIGN U ASSMIATES yT P ARCHITECTURE SITE PLANNING ' - PROGRAMA GEMENT I i � U FN � --- - W W � C) c) l 32]ST. {�� ,Ww Z_ GLS T Q , U Ll A O Qo N Q 'TFRRACE x J TT CC j i G W a Q W TT 11J J a � tWON < LOUNGE/LIBRARY I- U w TRASH' 0 I a 1 � nAUNA o U a. OJ U OPP, "A LL �:: VVV BEL i Q W w J " U = W U 1 � D DRAWING NO. 1 SCALE: DATE:5142017 i . • 1 TISE DESIGN 1 ASSOCIATES N CMITECTURE SITE PLANNING PROGRMA MNNAGEMENT R OILER 1 :co 'i 2x6 WALLS U O J 28'-0" SPAN 5'-6" 28'-0" SPAN -- $6 ----- ---------------- r ' 1� Q 00 ENGINEERED WOOD FLOOR W O I - - TRUSSES (n o N � WOOD DECKING _� � 1- ---- ------- ------- - H Q0 00 yo • — 8'-0" DROPPED CEILING U) 1 O Z --� -- 4---- -—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—- — G cn Lu ui •� Do 9'-0" CEILING DESIRED 3 J o Ln Q - w Q --�-- 3 -—-—-—-—-—- --- - - - -— A U W DO O I A 0 2 DECK 1 -- --�---- ------- -- - - - -- — — — - - - - - LM1 o z WALL _ Z 1 � O G RETAIL PARKING w F- GRADE ; LL1 (n 0 a ' � 1 G2 EW SLAB PARKING DRAWING NO. EW FOOTING IATI: i.o- io ATE:ti ai;+;11 i 1 �ISE DESIGN ASSOCIATES ARCH'TECTUR[ SITE P[ANMNG Q PROGRAM MANAGEMEN f ' F 1 1 R d t * 1 '1 k. ' a 1 � � 1 TISE DESIGN , � ASSOCIATES - _ ARCNirEcruac SITE PLPNNING PROGRAM MANAGEMENt 1 �t ,j \� 1 / a ` I 1 1 1 1 1 TISE DESIGN ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTURE L, SITE PLANNING O 1 PROGRAM MANAGEMENT 1 1 EWEN wir 1 Ili � oil 1 - _: 7n l 14 j 1 � �: - 111/1111 .i:lU: IIIIIIIIUII� 11' IIIIIIIIIIII 49 . 1 = - 1 Sim- _ _ a eu r , 1 TDA Ti o if � . - �i■ �� ..a , �. imp- W4.1 0 _ iUK t II= rt tr 11 III onto11 I �1I/ ow owl II , J1 jj u , 65 Washington Street - Program Summary ' TISE DESIGN { ASSOCIATES I ARCHITECTURE SRE PLANNING EN PflOGf1AM MMIAGEMENT ' Site Area: 22,440 S.F. Building Area (Enclosed): 81 ,153 S.F. ' Building Area (w/ Parking): 100,115 S.F. x Retail Area: 2810 S.F. (Incl. in Above) ' Height: 69 Ft. Tvpe/Number - Dwellina_ Units ' One Bedroom 8 • One Bedroom w/ Study 5 ' • Two Bedroom 38 • Three Bedroom 10 - t Total 61 Twe/Numbcr - Parkina_ Spaces ' Compact (7.5) 22 • Intermediate (8) 5 a ' Full Size (8.5) 34 (2 HP) • Tandem 6 - • Lifts (Optional) 21 (Potential) _ ' Total 88 ' Twe/Number - Bicvcle Storaa_ a • Wall Mounted - Secure 30 1 1 1 ' Urban Spaces, LLC Diamond Sinacori, LLC 1 65 Washington street - Response to 6/28/ 17 Comments TISE DESIGN ' ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTURE PROGRAMPMARAGE W NI a.) Complete revision of the ground floor treatment. Articulated synthetic stone base ► , ' has been deleted, and a new integrated base has been designed with utilizes 24" x _ 24" brick masonry columns at key locations, and steel columns with steel covers at the balance. The steel clad columns are assumed at 12" wide x 18" deep, and are recessed 6" from the stone lintel and masonry piers. The retail entry has been moved closer to Church Street and is much wider than earlier designs. Overall, the base is 7MIM rnLq more transparent and contemporary than the earlier iteration. The lintel band is flush,with a reveal 8" down from the top, referencing the 8" lintels on the upper floors. At ff expanses of the brick wall at the base, brick patterns are employed that stop 24"from the adjoining storefront or decorative panel, recalling the 24" brick piers used at the fully glazed areas. i �• b.) Awnings shown are blade type, not boxed. There is no dropped apron or side en- a closures. They are lighter and less boxy, and the color has been changed to a more subdued dark green. c.) The planter boxes have been reduced in vertical dimension to 12" high, with the .�_ - t top at 36" above the first floor. This will allow for a simple steel picket below, permit- ting visual access into the ramp areas. We feel having these boxed plantings as part ' of the streetscape is important, but have reflected the DRB's concern about "blind spots". d.) The storefront has been extended further towards North Federal Street as sug- gested by the DRB. This also results in a slight increase in retail square footage. , e.) Despite the signage being very preliminary, we have lowered the 65 numeral to align with the stone lintel as suggested by the DRB. further refinement of the en- trancern ' p 1' _ is assumed during DD. Ir [ n ^ � a f.) We feel the current cornice design with the expressed brackets is appropriate. z- It creates a distinctive illuminated signature piece that is integral to the design. We Q have reviewed options and are convinced what was presented is appropriate. 1 Tom Daniel From: Andrew Shapiro Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 9:12 PM To: Tom Daniel Subject: Fw: (City of Salem MA] 65 Washington St. "Salem District Court" Building (Sent by Patricia H Donahue, phdonahue@verizon.net) Public comment re Superior Court (I responded acknowledging receipt)... From:vtsdmailer@vt-s.net<vtsd ma iler@vt-s.net>on behalf of Contact form at City of Salem MA<vtsdmailer@vt-s.net> Sent:Tuesday,July 25, 2017 11:53 PM To:Andrew Shapiro Subject: (City of Salem MA] 65 Washington St. "Salem District Court" Building (Sent by Patricia H Donahue, phdonahue@verizon.net) Hello ashapiro, Patricia H Donahue(phdonahue@verizon.net)has sent you a message via your contact form (htto://www.salem.com/user/316/contact)at City of Salem MA. Contact Andrew Shapiro, AICP I City of Salem MA www.salem.com This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated Spam submissions. If you don't want to receive such e-mails,you can change your settings at htto://www.salem.com/user/316/edit. Message: I am a life-long resident of Salem and very much love and appreciate Salem's historic and traditional architecture.The proposed design does not reflect Salem's historic architecture in any way.The design shows a mammoth block of brick,so bland and unappealing. It ruins the streetscape of Federal,Washington and Church. It belongs in Boston,not in Salem.We are doing a disservice to Salem if we allow this type of architecture to blight our downtown. It is overpowering and simply out of place. It does nothing for our historic city. Please consider these comments. Thank you,Pat Donahue 1 a Tom Daniel From: Andrew Shapiro Sent: Tuesday,July 25, 2017 9:15 PM To: Tom Daniel Subject: Fw: [City of Salem MA) 65 Washington St, Diamond Sinacori Schematic (Sent by Deborah Prentice, prenticed45@yahoo.com) Attachments: salem_district_ct_condos_ljpg More public comment re District Court (I will respond acknowledging receipt)... From:vtsdmailer@vt-s.net<vtsdmailer@vt-s.net>on behalf of Contact form at City of Salem MA<vtsdma iler@vt-s.net> Sent: Wednesday,July 26, 2017 12:09 AM To:Andrew Shapiro Subject: [City of Salem MAj 65 Washington St, Diamond Sinacori Schematic (Sent by Deborah Prentice, prenticed45@ya hoo.co m) Hello ashapiro, Deborah Prentice(prenticed45@yahoo.com) has sent you a message via your contact form htto://www.salem.com/user/316/contact)at City of Salem MA. Contact Andrew Shapiro, AICP I City of Salem MA www.salem.com This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions. If you don't want to receive such e-mails,you can change your settings at httr)://www.salem.com/user/316/edit. Message: To the Design Review Board: The current design of the proposed building at 65 Washington St is probably the worst architecture we've seen in Salem in a very long time.It is out of scale. It is cheap looking and reminds one of nothing so much a a No-tell Motel.It is not at all in keeping with our beautiful"built environment" here in Salem.And worst of all,if it's built,we will all have to look at it for the rest of our lives,as will our progeny very likely,and theirs, etc. This has been a classic bait and switch on Diamond Sinacori's part. I realize there are contamination issues,but am told by a city official that DS had built contingencies in for those in their proposal.So why this drastic i change?It Is SO far below the more classic look of the first renderirg and totally tasteless. Wasn't the RFP granted on the basis of the original E rendering?(Att'd) How can DS expect to go from that to the current aborrination with no push back? Plus-once again,the city and the citizens are expected to pick up the weigh of developers crying poor mouth who whine that they can't make their bottom line(read, *anticipated* PROFIT)if the city doesn't bend.This is getting REALLY old. "If you don't cut us xyz slack,the project can't be done."At some point,it's time to tell them that if they can't do it, someone else can,and especially in this booming real estate market. I urge you,as the gate keepers of downtown design,to soundly reject this proposed atrocity in the heart of our downtown,and that's practically on top of(literally)the seat of our city government.Set precedent:that design might fly in Anytown, USA,or along an eight lane interstate highway,but it just doesn't here! *Please*send them packing and back to the drawing board! You may never know the extent of the grateful citizenry, but believe me- it's deep and it will surely exist. Thank you. Deborah Prentice 16 Hardy St cc:Mayor Kim Driscoll Salem City Councillors(All except Furey,no email) Cheryl LaPointe, City Clerk 2 10 Y t _ to ._ � l a1 Tom Daniel From: Andrew Shapiro Sent: Wednesday,July 26, 2017 5:37 PM To: stanzeen@comcast.net Cc: Tom Daniel Subject: Re: [City of Salem MA] 65 Washington St. (Sent by Stan Franzeen, stanzeen@comcast.net) Mr. Franzeen: Thank you for your feedback regarding the proposed project for the District Court site. We will ensure that the Design Review Board receives your comments ahead at tonight's meeting. Best, Andrew Shapiro Sent from my Phone >On Jul 26,2017, at 5:28 PM, Contact form at City of Salem MA<vtsdmailer@vt-s.net>wrote: > Hello ashapiro, >Stan Franzeen (stanzeen@comcast.net) has sent you a message via your >contact form (http://www.salem.com/user/316/contact) at City of Salem MA. > If you don't want to receive such e-mails,you can change your >settings at http://www.salem.com/user/316/edit. > Message: > Dear Mr.Shapiro: > I am writing to submit my comments for the record in re to the 65 >Washington St. design. I have had only a cursory chance to view the > initial schematic, but it seems to be inconsistent with the character of our city. > I believe the building should be far less obtrusive and overpowering >of the adjacent buildings and the historic Tabernacle Church.To that >end, I hope the final design: > 1) reduces in height both the left and right sections facing Wash. >St.,visually dividing the bldg into 3 connected sections; >2) replaces the flat roof with three pitched roofs over each of the >three sections; > 3) includes solar panels and all forms of energy conservation measures. > I will be unable to attend tonight's meeting, but I hope you share >this email with your colleagues. >Thank you. >Stan Franzeen > 34 Daniels Street >Salem 1 r Tom Daniel From: Andrew Shapiro Sent: Wednesday,July 26, 2017 3:10 PM To: ninavcohen@gmail.com Cc: Tom Daniel Subject: Re: (City of Salem MA] 65 Washington St Design Proposal (Sent by Nina Cohen, ninavcoheri@gmail.com) Nina- Thank you for your feedback on the proposed project at the District Court site.We will forward your comments to the DRB ahead of tonight's meeting. Best, Andrew Sent from my iPhone >On Jul 26, 2017,at 2:46 PM, Contact form at City of Salem MA<vtsdmailer@vt-s.net>wrote: > Hello ashapiro, > Nina Cohen (ninavcohen@gmail.com) has sent you a message via your >contact form (http://www.salem.com/user/316/contact) at City of Salem MA. > If you don't want to receive such e-mails,you can change your >settings at http://www.salem.com/user/316/edit. > Message: >To the Design Review Board, > I have submitted the attached letter regarding tonight's hearing on 65 >Washington St.for the consideration of the DRB. >Thank you, > Nina Cohen ><65_washington_st_schematic_design.docx> 1 Re: 65 Washington St Schematic Design To the Design Review Board: Designing a building that fosters an inviting pedestrian environment at the street level is key to the effort to demolish and replace the District Courthouse, and was emphatically part of City of Salem's Request for Proposal for the project. It is a directive of the Heritage East Urban Renewal Plan that planning should underscore this goal. When the SRA was created, John Collins emphasized the urban renewal plan would enhance"Salem's organic street pattern, ambitious pedestrian greenway network and historical landmarks..." From The Urban Design Concept by John Collins, published in Urban Design International, vol. 2, no. 1,November/December 1980. Diamond Sinacori's schematic design for a building with parking on the ground floor must meet this condition by enhancing the pedestrian environment on Washington St., Federal Street and Church St. One solution is to require the developer to create space on the first floor for restaurants or cafes, as the City did in developing the South Harbor Garage. Scratch Kitchen, now occupying the first floor of the South Harbor Garage, makes a lively addition to Salem's restaurant scene and anchors the Congress/Derby St. intersection where pedestrian elements are absent from the other comers. At a minimum, the proposed development should not be approved absent a design that includes 1,000 sf or restaurant or retail space on the building's Washington St fagade. Sidewalk width is another key issue,particularly given the height of this development. Fifteen to 20 feet of sidewalk setback is required to ensure the sidewalk is wide enough to accommodate flow traffic into downtown, seated cafe patrons and people entering the condo building. This setback is consistent with other new developments in downtown, including 135 Lafayette and the newly approved RCG hotel/residential complex on lower Washington St. For the 65 Washington St project, the DRB should mandate shade and rain canopies on Washington St that are continguous and uninterrupted, and the same on Federal and Church St. sidewalks. Finally, every new residential complex must provide bicycle racks for residents that are protected from the rain. These can be inside the first-floor garage or under a canopy. Thank you for considering these comments. Nina Cohen 22 Chestnut Street, Salem Salem ® Redevelopment Authority Design Review Board Proposal June 28, 2017 65 Washington Street "Salem District Court" (Diamond Sinacori, LLC and Urban Spaces, LLC): Discussion and vote on schematic design review for proposed development project. Proposal The enclosed submission from the applicant is a plan set that incorporates comments from the DRB that were provided at its meeting on January 25t'. The total unit count now stands at 61, with 61 onsite parking spaces, and additional six tandem spots (21 parking lifts/stackers are being considered). Storage for 30 bicycles will also be provided. The amount of proposed commercial space on the ground floor has been reduced from 3,000 sf to 2,810 sf. It is still proposed to be located at the corner of Church and Washington Street. The ground floor elevation at Federal Street will contain parking on the other side of the wall. Staff Comments There has been much internal discussion (with the developer) about improving the ground floor Federal Street elevation. It's challenged, given the need for parking in that location. The applicant is making efforts to provide robust landscaping, street trees, and street furniture. We are also working with the City's Public Art Planner, Montserrat College of Art President Steve Immerman, and a public art consultant retained by the applicant, on ways that public art could potentially improve the visual appeal of that elevation. Any public art option will require a great deal of thought and time to develop; therefore we do not anticipate that the applicant will show the public art (during the schematic design review phase) at this time. We ask that the DRB work with the applicant on further improvement to this elevation with the understanding that public art will most likely play a role there. Proposal —January 25, 2017 In September of 2015 the applicant was selected by the SRA to redevelop the District Court property at 65 Washington Street. The original proposal that earned the selection called for 61 condominium units with 8,400 square feet of retail on the ground floor, and 82 parking spaces (many underground). The applicant has since changed architects and has revised its design. The proposal calls for a six story building with between 62-64 condominium units, parking spaces located one floor below grade and enclosed at grade, and a terrace at the rear of the Salem ® Redevelopment Authority building on the second floor. The project also calls for 3,000 square feet of subdividable retail space to be located at the corner of Church and Washington Street, with frontage continuing down Church Street. Enclosed for your review are a cover letter(it is tucked further into the packet), a property survey, rendered perspectives and elevations, a locus map with photos of existing/surrounding context, and floor plans. Staff Comments — January 25, 2017 This project was presented to the SRA on January 11, 2017, where it was approved to move on to the DRB for review of schematic design. i 65 Washington Street 1 Program Summary A SE DESIGN "' .! •,�;. . ASSOCIATES wZCInTECTVR r1 �� SITE PL NING v RCG M MRNHGEMENT _I LI � . 1 Site Area 22,440 S.F. • • 11 Q I�r Building Area (Enclosed): 81 ,153 S.F. 1 Building Area (w/ Parking): 100,115 S.F. ■ •� m�j�] J �� I - Retail Area: 2810 S.F. (Incl. in Above) I 1 Willi. I� Ih �� 17 ,�.■Height: 69 Ft. _ � � _ 1 3i Twe/Number - Dwellina Units 1 One Bedroom 8 r • One Bedroom w/ Study 5 - _ - &.�, a 1 mu Two Bedroom 38 '• Three Bedroom 10 all 1 Total 61 1 Twe/Number - Parkina Spaces • Compact (7.5) 22 • Intermediate (8) 5 1 Full Size (8.5) 34 (2 HP) • Tandem 6 • Lifts (Optional) 21 (Potential) 1 Total 88 s a 1 Tvae/Number - Bicvcle Storaae • Wall Mounted - Secure 30 �■ s® \ I 1 jr 1 Urban Spaces, LLC Diamond Sinacori, LLC 1 1 1 L30CURCH ST � 3-3_FEDERALSi. ---_ -� ----- - RC)W — - — - TRANSFORMER TISE DESIGN DISSOCIATES I ARCHITECTURE SRE PLANNING PROGRAM MANAGEMENT ;Q6WN VE I 7RA I' � irk ' I �ROLLING DOOR I -- - - - O 35F4521 531 541 551 i`i V z •N 36F 32 CHURCH ST. w C ' y Z zz 1�{. 37 F > ]48D I Li r BIKES - DISP AY LLB r N Q L1J c� o W 38F I Z U BENCHES aAuv uv ART PANELS +2 1 39F BUII-DING ABOVE I = W I U Q () Q JLn � � aoF I = W I c� t0 V� Q m W 41 F I r ' LL - - PLANTE u W t2 63F 64F 65F I 0 42 F BENCHES I ART PANELS 1 43F - '�—_— _ _ 1 ., 44F - UP I I, O Q GROUND LEVEL ` O J D_ PARKING �Q PACKAGE J U LL COMPACT SPACES - 7.5 X 16 =3 45F CONCIERGE LPL I INTERMEDIATE - 8 X 18 = 5 O Q FULL SIZE SPACES - 8.5 X 18 =21 y _ z w DISABLED = 2 TOTAL SPACES 31 SPACES- 0 U (D U) ART _I RETAIL: 2,810sq.ft D ONAWING NO. PLANTER WASHINGTON STREET OAT DATE:51X2017 � TISE DESIGN \� ASSOCIATES I ARCHITECTURE SITE PLANNING PROGRAM W=EMENT RAMe I J 1 I i W o � Wz G � N D06 I Z = o 1 2 C I, 'I F ,Q,ww 0 ' 21 F 22T 31 T 33T 34T I I Y/ 3 C Z U 27T 29T Q J 23F J=,w 2 4 C - Y/ w W I 3 WQ ' 5 C MT 24F a- 32F 34F 35F I cf) 6 C 25F 26F 28F 30F I W Y/ m w \1 J F LL F i l ' 7 F - RAMP /rOVE a I t I Z Q J Z F LOWER LEVEL METERSS JECK A,90VE Lu Q PARKING u _ COMPACT SPACES - 7.5 X 16 = 19 FULL SIZE SPACES - 8.5 X 18 =11 RAMP ABOVE METERS - - - - ; m �U TANDEM — 8.5 X 18 = 6 `L I 20C ' TOTAL SPACES 36 SPACES r aldE'<'-nvATED 8 C 9 C IOC 11 C 12C 13C 14C 15C 16C 17C 18C 19C I DRAWING NO. T DAE: DATE:5/3/20 t) 2BR TISE DESIGN t ASSOCIATES 2BR I I _ I uCHITECTURE SITE P NNING �\ MOGR MANAGEMENT Ra :4 PLANTER 77 � I -- LP 2BR . W z 2BR - - 2BR = _I 000 , Oct Q N o ' Q Tl / Z CC Lu 1.58R 2BR CL Ln Z ' J W W Q LOUNGE/LIBRARY �• t m EXERCISE �/ p W C 6 SAUNA ' eJ Z O } �.� f OPEN TO 1 J U BELOW1- 0 Q w Z � ' Ow 3BR z W U DRAWING NO. 1 SCALE:I-16' DATE-SRnnrr �P�e S_A�eC� -t7C� IS,?1A As O�8(Ak-e cv-,- 5//J/17, 1 1 TISE DESIGN ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTURE �... SITE PLANNING% PROGRAM MANAGEMEN i .v 1 . � y�_ I _ m 1 1 [a i ....o....-�Fft� I 1 1 1 TISE DESIGN ' ASSOCIATES PgCRRECTIRE SITE PIA.NG PROGRM MANAGEMENT Poo 1 .A' 1 1 '1 1 1 1 TISE DESIGN ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTURE SIM PLANNING PROGRAM MANAGEMENT i 1 1,�. \ 8 1 I 1 10 'fill i V L ' ¶® • ' - jail;w 1 - 1 1 TDA � pr 'P r° f I dlil�lfbii � � 1 1 � � • ' �� w � 1 IAIIGtIr; ,, � �t� FF 1 '___ • - • wa � � r � � 1 AL 1 � � TISE DESIGN ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTURE SITE P NING PROGRAM MANAGEMENT IL11 mar I Anne mill .. I_ It 1 1 171 p� �� 'ram •�• J� it P.1 1 t ISE DESIGN 1 ASSOCIATES AP A�*( N PI PNNGFMFNT 1 IIIIII IIIII �� - IIIIII - __ _ �uo� _•'-��' � ,I��:_.Ililll-11IIIp� �� 1 v } 1ii � r r nR � YrVi If of .IOf 1 i ' TISE DESIGN ASSOCIATES RRCHITECTURE SITE PI NING PROQR MMN GEMENT 1 t i .lo- - '\ it s � a inf 1 1 \\ ISE DESIGN ASSOCIATES 1 � 1 . \ l L r I 1 1 ' TISE DESIGN ASSOCIATES ARONrt E SITE PUNNING Ar PROGRAM MWJAGEMENT 1 T 8 ' I T r a t ' Y n4a *7 � �y`€Y' y I, uuuwuuuL%O Irk .. - �k _ �W��iTuii�nmull _ l �.s nc rCE .fp l lr to ll,Iral � L I ,�i _ 1 1 1 � � 1 TISE DESIGN ' ASSOCIATES ARCKTECTLRE - SITE PU NING PROGRAM MANAGEMENT 1 (/ 1 0 TDA o min MIN !� !!! , II II 11 �� II II of In II 11 11i1 Iry '•I I�1 , II II 11 Milo II II �11 li 11 lie! I®' ,vim 1 NMI !' iii - nn big t_ .. re AN i r iio 1 TISE DESIGN ' ASSOCIATES A CHIWCNHE SUE Pw NING C GROGRAMM GEMENT ' IN - �_ r ..iceIppr 14 ■ � ILA;ram F �� --^ -'. � IiV•1 V11111•til-1,1VV1•Ii,11V 1-FY ' -" ems/ 1 � ! • �- • FLAG OPTION A ' r ISE DESIGN ASSOCIATES A CWTECTURE C SRE Pl NING PROGRAM MFNAGEMENT 1 1 1 r 1 � Alp _ = I1 1 m711111111111111 i ri KHW HE i _Nil Tor y Ila - {{{ ` i.. ~-'� +.r�S" ham' �..:a:;i � �',a -•+".. r _ � FLAG ' OPTION B Y r ,eh I t' i vfft 65 y .TISE DESIGN ASSOCIATES I PLANNING ARCHITECTURE I PROGRAM MANAGEMENT 65 WASHINGTON ST, SALEM ` 0. sMHepZ uC.A"`A`O 10 GNO II![f WSVflANCE GUNPµY AN9 ND OMCP BENCHMAHK.•iUMMAFY LONYOIMfAL IN LAN°PRE MYI.q.NtE CLYPW/ 4IAO,O,O'Y(NI NLN°EF: S91 :HIS K Z C11 1.°!.I 'rHMC OESCP/PII0.N ELF'. 1cwLFF Mtt'RBgIiAY 1 10ra 5 P/AN IS,NE IICAI 1 Ary AC/GL ON Q µRI MLPAM�L 16}, 16 sGIFDVLF D-WOO,1 IXGEPNLW$ yA 'O'°RPPUAR/IMRro°flNµO,OA EBPLUR+ IR rE�IyLY0,4 pfSGBPIdtl d'�Cl6L ]•:' PITSs LW AND mE AOI ON MATH 11 15 NOr SLWYtY PfZARL .16 IIEAE MAa£IH ALY 11, WIM PIE 3016.xNIYUN glANpir OCIaL EYACf ACPULE APG I$AS SN°WN RFO✓M[VFN01!OR Hr.M UN'J rl�lF [MYAcylra0,I/w ) 9x$d69/a?}G $AIIA..WN:Lv E.SNf°,,S �J 5 (W RAIW fOl uA"" BrA IA AVO NIPS. 160 INCL✓UE$/I[MS 1. OMxS er INE SALLL arsnJ/Acza9 J.+,s. 6f.).al el. ](.,. W=I1 01 e. 9. fl[OLYf.LOPMFrvr Aum°Rln rl. J. IbIN°VIs(.R O/. (NO! Q RI6Nr C,'HAY IO yy.ai]5/AS SSJ RS/A.)1 18(/ANC V O F.GJ. 19..Vp [NJ.XSI Sr0EEr m(l,Y)cF!A&£A MIs l pACMPNINOw , PINT Px.1~'0i656 MC 5✓8/£Lr A.I IS L°GIID IN IUNC © RILNI$IN fECF/GL SINf[) A265+5/10699 Fqp NEf✓S IR.Y USC ONCY Y(UNSNAOCaJ 'IRFAS D 1 CR I°BE mars w m✓Ew0 s`"ssl e:as s�m LEGEND °Nlscr . s avNML<1. m GxawnW-.s vroM av new W.cIRAIICE >e Nw raft [nrr Or.u,IXt a-� INSY[H✓RTS[SS0 L01190.L w A, LOCUS MAP "�j°® � oPUN uexlrote(DNNJ N) P NE<`rnY,OAO,(oip1.Iw Y°ia9E0"'VG nN SCFEP NPNIKKE(SVIII ® x5.NAS Pp[pµg9"[,,MINX[( fW_rr r0 3L,14 R CLLL IWC I4MIwA'L 21,1» gMSIEPS OF OiF .PVFD.1��]6 .w Me)-la.c+ r� TIC..IMNNOL£f,MN, ()1 ANJ.5E0 AWWRr 1} lm,, WHY F igM.Y,pr GILN 010"(LB) ❑ PEC0`0% PR°PRpPRIY lVtiS SIgNM M, FEDERAL STREET IIM.11 z`sAiH m5 G E P LWES R AWL GK WAU 1,G¢ •®U OR'�WA1..N AY 1No E OF 11XC OF G9 G2 [} PPrWR SIPE[,f AX°XNK MFT/LY m(y.re4 /jI'� ar c FSI.W(ISIFJI.µV'r ryO M[w L:NC$rOR NAM >r �� I(R ® PK hHLON OFEVMMERSMIP VR FW Yf LGII! 0 NOl MIS AK SIgWN PARK/NGSUMMARY m IW.rvIRm'I�n � ® 99 m(E "a ef°c°a 0" 11IMAl I`m.maw vex IxF q£<ueunc Ix Hors aw Is Iron A S M AAOv STAL15 /6 g mAvs.uGER ¢nrNrArzw ro}M PRr nP°MNcmmv 8 A mFPFUPEAIOtSM SON. OF HANOICAGP£O STALLS I W � 0/OWINO P10 C APE$MOWN =s •"�l t� - I:::WIr OJ u+-µ rLaNOAAP.¢YN• L� ccoRww ro cURR£NI Mry OF NQY TblAAl.SlALJ$ i] wri 3 _ ,. " [�Lacr.X. - nwXlNc L¢rFR iszrss°xs IwwPurc« ® rNF AdOK K cEPrexa Io Pe ersl a HµdGPPf°PAFWINa$P,LE A P.1(1 xA�RM1AWWewe,WlIW. 'AiI Is MAur �- .1..RF]E A O EIS F AB014 M1tlYEO r%RIIEY e NAT15'69F I+J96' �,RIE HR<R [ I "6 • r 'LAY - 0110 m/pfpMnn J2 . e✓ILVINC VKRMWL°M W^r LIMISSUED FREVIEW wrON1, 0,,1 � 9.SS I%F AAIIILPS Lw! As CESCPo&0 IN<DMYQ•IA£KM I/NJ PItE INSVPAACC OJNPAXY A[iA �w'r9@YnI r r]r n.ALIT NNNNEM AO,8,1 ]91 CRFCPK M2:ifbRVM✓S 1.10 O ® IVII.IS}6] 1a5 L4Po ll T.1NOTIIFvZYd!-FOR NY FfpYGP MP^FPIv MIAl LYIE NA/OR<SSDCUICi Ni A Ce'Rraw PAI.E'LL OF GNv 10,P Y Yp.W^s i XOO N.r[u A. 3 £ 1 � a I.•� _c l,N£PER ILx sI,,CM£ Mr CTaKR cA Op l S -1 A,I A WAS CIOPX O. I` Ix GD GLf,! 3 £�� 1 eco- Jz a.N a OAS LrI+F Lrnxc sIAwN As PMYFL Rca oN A P,AN mnrzm, roAnPEflry ouX. ^"'• - P OAS I/NE uv wn °[saWnax P.P°IECI NV. WgS.fl-95. MFPAAVE PUE G9I,,Si1IN PFOEYn IYNEN! I - "1 yA. AOIIORPY gU1F r' IO'.GRO ZIOOMW I. eI".. W,.@ 00W0.Po. ,Cf a[CIRK UN£ We.EPavFe°s AND xcwr(ez'eM,xv[0 Axv vaeXlRm As en a. ___ IFLmwM Lwf DIAMOND SINACORI,LL[ .sl.R er Msnncrov smrr..axe llll R surn Fx.w° I'' I I �r1.-mo, - rvvrvxmr AMA rM 7 HARCOURT STREET a/rv°(1.00)IEn W QP �I Fz BOSTON,MA 01116 AWML3v BY PIPLCI IR 1 AS$NOWN 0.X SLN PIN' WiE INNORQ! LPYOFSALFM " I'^\\ M'ISMO n0(W QNAIgN R( FOmA MNF£A1. 85/IVA^I1 a6I 2C: Lll .l AG ORSP 35CBW0 QI V NN I 6JtlO NG MILHr °N ggR(l: F/SiE%Y 9v^ARL£L RC] MFY^ I A.PAKn R 1 AS ARPA"22.44Ot SF 3� A (y OPVWN0V5 d.. SHONN PV SVV PLAN /pK MSIAhY!OF daE IrIIHOIlEO I a I (Q 3lSAcl E 9 N 1J0q[TE COxc. yX1Y yN AHp re/100(1661P,!C£L ,; tev nP,]l I R 1 SIpXY sWIHEr2v M VNIr%ryl 5]REEr ECiPEEYI lN0 11n1V tic!' L evILX RMLaNa . LPwIIf ,,PAN 65 WASHINGTON STREET w[srLALr or vIM(1 R-u As s.3wX On wv PLAk rrw(Y-xINF n �Sgr .'r. - , - -,eu y s,rsO3cT ANo I O,,A r+969)Fr£I: `•, 3 I ]' r✓w9 ws eJnnu c£xrrR !9L) SALFM.MA $WIIKMf BYSAIO PARYR R-$A,A MIAf OISC9A'C(°E"FlfIY µ° A ywy BPrLN BU'LOr.4G r _,t MINNRLEV C9NLMIE WP£ AYP '1./rM($a riEL fR 11 L Bn 4.11..1J1f9! "' cT r. © - mi t NIRRRO GCIA nPE Gsr[m+ er sAIO -u RFn-nro AND a/r0O!9z uJ l � \ N/r Asrr[$Gs cur Prof x gyPpp ngem un: ayv/u rEa 0 I .ms+ w TI Jv cNuxN srNw„uc xv P'P(s Lrsrelr Nvv it sOVME9.Y Br 1.I sl)`,,I.pIAL OISIWCE 0!N/NF]1 ANU I J9.91' '3 ER.iMB}/i'G 150 5//1°0(9°.511 RFI � J A I NP Cr NA,EP IW I 5'1rw swr: r-m vvu NV6:LS19w14TA sM PawCa C'M 1.0 1zu°1V FEET Cr IAXV ACtt .W.0 !rS •'I ou,Pl s© OR r Aiwr N/F prgrr®w. y< .. V. re..N Z I A IRS X= se«r• 7I / NDsalrlw ewx ar ,,10, NFSERW IIDx IV A RrC v of Mr s 0fL NG.Cv on�U " 1 cP. r y aB' PAVE P4 GN 0 pEN- 0 E ux N m o MJaINN°snrD Pca Tx SR0'00']r w P`4r0 HEPEN LOM£,Yv AN0.,I .PAP[a�-s AND MM'a 3 /sBTv:'w r. •�'� au rWc / q,}' lJX'�I�G'6 AXV✓MY `I_,AR°Alr PILN pr n B(,6ED RN KNFLES s}' �JP05'Jrw U V LFYN/P A I.A$ P2CS - ML V FOi MF PUMg5f.LF sER.T-MG!NF • I ,g5 gg 8 aM 1990/IY A69 p�[R�py,,�,� C/M1<✓54£N ASii55QVSY PAttFL J$-U6L0-I VU,IOrNLS RESIN L 51 WIEO III PMCQS N} NV R 1A SLI°RANI OF $ V l _ yrw '� -(� muu' DEEU 9DUX I'.MLE.1 WqY afIIrs RDNN°L°AN°xSLP,M°AS IOLLOWS r��-.--Lr -•-�'�i� - , PGN,cNX I.D P�18 ALLEN & MAJOR .MRLY NF cNYRLN A' r-.IPfEN II' ,o"`A rlara rm: r`Q+ J.�� ASSOCIATES INC. M$lCRIY w v ,--J.oac NWvfl n r001 wAv/10 A[r DOOR'x 13 �3 -`RAx a Puu vax ras.Pl,w e FEFr. J Yr Pox 9 D R n •ea..p...rl.rvi..n..r..1ln NJPmrinr fy neE IrcLw.wxe roR/rov Lx PA4en x-J. mlRr£Cx AxV w tY �- -L[c I°SIIXJTU51.Pl.vr J5 ...r. -- ...lu.r.l..a•...e.,nlr..l... 91/I[V(IS9/J rEA. / JSR'#r 0r PhRft 11 All Y/ALn P} As SWOMW Ov SIN PJN.CNC IlOOM/1 NNE AN0 9%r00 1 r09.F)!RI v Nwry .W)Rru AwROW IS 84£II ON YtSLCNV4TS CWG[YIPPd.W IE CHURCH STREET RY(Y D ,r D P„ J w ,.A MK Isv MPI£-0111) � MVPGf µ0 W ,FR H[/I R 4I0@ vw m PP4IDwW m nrn�.a.xr C nNEI'If// /50 )REELS IqY Of O([°SW UMMIOG£..MA w))[f](xevl J TER A OsO I NNN IS W9I1 Hq N @v®q.>AF rywuulrruvRi- , rpVIWR WRINAI 6 ON(fCOI(I'1 S ORYWLE I s NLS le OF MRR A.IM lY£M sUAVET. rrarM.fumurdnP wr T I/PLT'vRA}WENE aRNN AlF SI D N.O IPF BL+`0 UPON RFC 1 ou xrmY'wtvw INFORKKI/0.N AID SHOUW 0E CONSrOLA£V APPMA'IWR ME VPLINL$SHOWN NK PCCN 1.110 FR FPCU swmr rMCR rlaX Ann FA.Mnx,Nvs°YAL•ry N GRAPHIC SCALE ,u L,A,rM Assxe:[s..vx(aYl,rwXEs NO pLaPLX,¢ u'uiy�zvm�ixY�� IWI THE UI4TES SHDWN H(REVN Cd/%hOR ALL SLCN V..M51N mF APEA£LINER IN 1 O.T£LW AMNOWrFp. CPP.9/II°wE A[R Ah_ N!I/gMERNU(HS NVI NARRANI NN.mC Vn(I m ry rsi1r 11 IFD mC11 E1 111.�urn' Ms 1„��Ir. ALTA/NSUR LAND TRLE SURVEY NJrrroPr.'rslerw-vrlrvmenaw+mxsm-Fr-n'nMA ASSOCIATESM 65 3 PS "I Sln ` J.,. - y ' III 4 , . _ ..i `• "�T l� JLai l 1. H to _ V �� `� 'J' ,•• ��.1*-1 .��1 }�T�� =� 'S�� a _,}� 1•�� I 1 �� 1 •`{ e. :�I'�1 V ��hl,•I_�I �r•Y i 1 ` _ F t A CA SON w It - - .. - ��':�vy r.ti�,`�1-, � �,:�" ~_�"�.r � l it � ••, ®��-. Ilk • +_� � �� • _} I y,. 1 TISE DESIGN ASSOCIATES I PLANNING I ARCHITECTURE PROGRAM MANAGEMENT 65 WASHINGTON ST, SALEM I I■; DWG ASK- /' - - a.Tw.O'P•r-wln A^¢O1In1 _ Dale 5-10.201] MN� NMyWeAIL / �yy I 1 _ % I E [YyT[a0^'nwe [rtt Y/sl'['I• N R MOYBII I I 1 ---_ wNN Qwuw Tw I I 1 � \ I I k R It S � T rarowv- - I I A 1 I Ilv[.m.Irsi) I N p ,' \\\ ,'♦ 11 �' t ` .s• a. !¢IG �u.F r mF�[.wr,aBs sr¢alrlu-lexs. a \ , LcrATIGI R- w-mc. .wo�. c rn ` I .Rlor•Ir.a.,. \ .. I t " Lam,y-i„•y-"-"_ �y'L[L�c�^�'raH'¢[w tlWW .lwur¢v I dS 7 / _ / 1 IA« wW G,.,.,.nNu ra+•UCN NHy'.w^Ta0'" f / _ .ilr neu+e w ¢Di nOi G^eN R.o+at N.•u mi[C G[IMFwIu-K N'N¢riKV bi M.�S WR✓W�MBjYLP MV 4WW % //// = 11 N -°WR- •IYl LO[.MRrTW+WO WPv10BwRM INGUI p TNR IaJj1DT, IQ �] _ I R'� MAaiifP•¢ '�RWILK�• \ UYy1� 4. wcrn m lr l Nvrao IRN°R+'f vex sxwL rs IN, unT ar wntr- GCYvaTla.e% Rer¢.c tD elrT N'.[.•1..ie erRn � 1O In - F I I 6 ILI - 1 YMO I_____ "" NNQ[ O.IV•N/..10/fI.MK ID / 1 w/te.- IT°Dr MNNeoI a . , , .,«, WN, ,•� ...., ' f°` 1' �.d - ♦ aA-<• —>I.......�../.y_ r_aRa,a a I � � :� R IN, U"c:r> LE✓,EN� �� i' 1 rNcr*/PT:INB g ES �� 2 1 � // 1 a a• i f • � F BIG,t* ��A"or a�iw W4aG cNr/.Mt fs4V O InM O M,•'fxY' TRB. � 3 ��, ur r« / i I EXIhTYJ6 +�ETE.M1�h DLYLRI.1� J� T / / I Y ♦ Nu it pauNrI I paP g 1 WPI 4 r M rllOucT 6Ba .. nLZ DUTe1Cr cover «• _ —_ _g'� GXURLX r gTICEET I easex DWI IaY. YB9l. l _ •,,,.� y,�¢pso[u+'T"u pRrdl°" MA"a� ITHE COMMONWEALTH MASSAC S M\T 1Y... � nMpm 1N yga[II BUILDING MB GOMaTMICT10-IOM . y[Vlw¢p MM NO. � REVISIONS CONDITIONS PLAN L I -I J dal DESCRIPTION IAT! ]EXISTING f B� I1 WNITMAN 9 HUWARD, INC. 1 ENGINEERS BNO ARCHITECTS ` I n eNw ST eOlTGN. YMIs. SCALE:1/B'•I'e ! • 1_. — I ,u<® DATE'.913` E BEN P,I9TB 4ttCeFDFAC ' p awc ASK- 5 10 211 wale v. � I � I I I � I ok I I y �i a J 1 C II Zz C O 2 C 22T 21 F 31 T 33T 34T ; w 3 C d 27T 29T � 23F y 4 C ate¢ 7 e 5 C 24F 32F 34F 35F 6 C 25F 28F 28F 3DF 1� III II � s R g �w LOWER LEVEL PARKING _ COMPACT SPACES - 7.5 X 16 = 19 FULL SIZE SPACES - 8.5 X 18 =11 TANDEM - 8.5 X 18 = 6 METERS 18C 19C 20C I TOTAL SPACES 36 SPACES CTro.^r / UNEXCAVATEDEXCAVATED 8 C 9 C l O C 11 C 12 C 13 C 14 C 15 C 16 C 17 C JSTOLi� A� �yScAu _EN T (PRELIMINARY) WASHINGTON ST ,�/ _ DM ASK- 0a10 5.10-2017 xix ,_mo I I I I v td I RAMP OO M i I +0 • 46C PLANTER O 35 F 47D 511 511 521 531 541 551 a� \��\�\� 41 ®NE RKt O 37F - 48D - orsPuv W 38 F I W - FAYP IIP ' 2 I 39 F P b 40F 49C III IIIIII 41 F I µ}me}}{ •• LIIIIIIIII 1 +2 56F 57F 58F 59F 60F 61F 62F 63F 64F 65F ® �� 42F 3z� II I Fu 43 F — J G�O�IZND LEVELLEVEL uP PARKING 44F COMPACT SPACES — 7.5 X 18 NN 3 I � INTERMEDIATE — 8 X 18 = 5 45F FULL SIZE SPACES — 8.5 X 18 =21 I �7 DISABLED = 2 TRASH TOTAL SPACES 31 SPACES w RETAIL 2,810sq.ft. �R FIRST o L (PRELIMINARY) WASHINGTON ST_ ows ASK- 0am 5-10-2017 xve1,119. �B U U 2M , I - I I L . ❑ ❑ 'L'J PLPNnR 6 )GD 1 C ❑ zaa � � � � zap IL I J 1.5BR W ❑ � a _ m (� 7 a r LOUNGE/LIBRARY I IBASkiIVI \\ EXERCISE A VA v _ $TGRAGE �� Vic" ��6 L y s X LJ o o . . 015;FC9p LEVEL (PRELIMINARY) DAG ASK- 2B8 00 _ i w U V W [Z� _ C a 2@8 � - _ ❑ : A IfLOD O 1.5BR 0. a C c� e�- g s� G 0 s ❑ � o IJ IJ � ❑ �srA ❑ o ❑ o ❑ CTHI�q. —FIFTH LEVELS (PRELIMINARY) DM ASK— Do s-iazm� 2@fl 2@R I � I � o I zz o I1 d 1 _ rn ?@E Z 0 z Q �i W 1BR W/STUDY � a MR I E MR29 1 OE N4 s `8 RASH R n I � y ILI pF,q Lm+ i c 1. J� 1- 1CSaxTII LEVEL (PRELIMINARY) i' � w 1 . 000 110 t t I. tr�J� .�Y�• V IN „GOOD t rocs TISE DESIGN ASSOCIATES I PLANNING ARCHITECTURE I PROGRAM MANAGEMENT 65 WASHINGTON ST, SALEM I I■ 1 w- . i + UIL d _ y. TISE DESIGN ASSOCIATES I PLANNING I ARCHITECTURE PROGRAM MANAGEMENT 65 WASHINGTON ST, SALEM I I■p e e Salem ® Redevelopment Authority Design Review Board Proposal January 25, 2017 65 Washington Street/ Salem District Court Property (65 Washington Street, LLC c/o Diamond Sinacori, LLC): Discussion and vote on schematic design review for proposed development project Proposal In September of 2015 the applicant was selected by the SRA to redevelop the District Court property at 65 Washington Street. The original proposal that earned the selection called for 61 condominium units with 8,400 square feet of retail on the ground floor, and 82 parking spaces (many underground). The applicant has since changed architects and has revised its design. The proposal calls for a six story building with between 62-64 condominium units, parking spaces located one floor below grade and enclosed at grade, and a terrace at the rear of the building on the second floor. The project also calls for 3,000 square feet of subdividable retail space to be located at the corner of Church and Washington Street, with frontage continuing down Church Street. Enclosed for your review are a cover letter (it is tucked further into the packet), a property survey, rendered perspectives and elevations, a locus map with photos of existing/surrounding context, and floor plans. Staff Comments This project was presented to the SRA on January 11, 2017, where it was approved to move on to the DRB for review of schematic design. DIAMOND SINACORI REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT TISE DESIGN ASSOCIATES I PLANNING I ARCHITECTURE I PROGRAM MANAGEMENT 65 WASHINGTON ST, SALEM T 16M4 Oesenrpr�r,�. [S�t'. � ^C bra ^4 6 Z L[mw rwr �Av. IfLIL.bNA'L [Ll9LbiC v frwpP9[P&wF(mtx rrv� ® s) IX KRIXA rU Sr(P KJ ® urn•« 4[5>rJ�Jf erd.ala4 i!d J/e�s r/).e.4 Timm.�rx5ra rw- ® min r,a/„fv '•<. ,, r f A 1 msr.IXrai •...m [wKR[N LI © xurC.swe < uJ/v¢.0 ^Y MOSAr uX_-�. Su&Rr�56w 6IW«P � n«m.'wt nrcn srs/ttasv a:[na LEGEND 1 0CUS MAP r,r Y,-pY• 1 _ �.rr m um5 arm rr wrz':�ra FEDERAL S TREET 12 _...�..�n `�ci r O D �w,wr[sslH[a�Ritrr�.roY Ve�� .�i.!�\ �.. 4[wN Q ix[��Pr�vbrw4�bw(�fro>N m PARHING SUMMAflY oaRo SYAus 16 � 6 6 ®—�sp m �� ® [�xrr�rwe eo ar un<o=wenw +�o/uvvm SYaus I � uwwx�wri�or�rn.x w `iAL STA115 )l �. • n. b.4 U✓ u M ,eJe'B I1Y' M.'J" °ygf.jrY < viwu'< ns5[4M5, ��'r r awnes �ry unrx Tv'XO Y.[t �SSMN M)tM1[M'MIXvM � W14e • n @r E tv..IXN nN rmrsi Av pK MxruY 1prSO4 +•M ' � +/�::". © � ,� t — _.. ISSUED FOR REIREINAl ws ws<xat wa T .atn..x 1 11 .w euvnwrs .a va+ o,r i l �f r ,x" as"'cwr a°"u awL> vsrtnrwwz.e..v+,crw srx[n.x wwPno srm+M Nam ``- \„r..¢J, "`"""••• a7 �CDIJIIT STREIT u[ l l ®® r I \ ^t BOSfCN,M403f 16 %A 1o1.i l f yalF aa` zro..exs.wrw�m,%r�ii wa.'e'm.rw.<e Ks n '•�-`°�`4n� . %er�e,n an: e L J q a^e•a+• :.... 65 WASHINGTON STREET rmt> et a-, srexry o- ,..t 7 iw .R..0 ° } 'a.t ° ctxrze !nl 6ALEM.IM �P 4P°zalrpru wrw<s rr.m uoi Ar mwws:crtx2 ex sOurNnr i./rN'atttt x.N m.TO utl.J/rM(Y.J, 2,. ¢ rrs r,ll,i4 ®\ 4r roi x T sCuwtn. n iw.Kx@s�i Rn,Mu grsV4 w rwS..wp `C aW nW<[5:vnNmmC>]..n sIXW[/N M r.u'O.[[MGwE r0 Lq I r •® }e u px rpwrxtr x/r 2 p® lc� 1 r �3•'•v. --( �- a_�5.>h+« ALLEN& MAJOR �n >x w.<,r,,.5•.ro rr.N,P iw nrr¢wr ® -�� F ASSOCIATES,INC. =•,zc. ,M xtx<�MrR«w wxa x<u o-»rv+.+n _ _Ta -µ ..,¢ .., ... _ x CHURCH STR®ET "�4 maw C¢ar lNs Lpx' rC�Wl;&16r 'X s¢x5xv NnmSi. a4pwrW.MI SMlvrO X CMFMntO aoeN>m,r( .qplevi uu(i,5nw wrs w -.Ir\I'III� -i 11.1, __ W.Vx4fAYur� (Yu)✓a6 r9 f.,uYNf<` �!"+� ,..raR M�faIX4�nIrYP ry¢[pM6f 4r SLCw vY �m� � K ^MM[4 wn amrseusritirzo t�r>KKr�ANro°vrzm[s'� xrwene,rurr.mm� M•u>su ALTA,M1Yp�� y LAND TfftE SURVEY TISE DESIGN ASSOCIATES PLANNING ARCHITECTURE PROGRAM MANAGEMENT 65 WASHINGTON ST, SALEM s 11 111 III p SAICp�``' ri h M jwl �;s ll� 111 1►��!�;�u uli�li� IL _ �, �i i qi „► �'pi uteri 1� .I n in a In _ TISE DESIGN ASSOCIATES I PLANNING I ARCHITECTURE I PROGRAM MANAGEMENT 65 WASHINGTON ST, SALEM I I c 4 wI�I �I �I■�I� 0 EIS � � u1 � n1 In n1 n u1 ICI i I Lei III W LI 91 19 LI In IN I I i1 I_ I1 ■I lu In nl nl III III III ICI . 1 I I I In a nl 1111 I■I ol _ �� _ �l11111 =_■ s � _ JF111�IF /l '�' 1 Ir ll' f I�I ' NI I� lI k+tP YTI/I 6 klt�YaFr �� pl ... III i - ►�/ I� �,. , � � � ��I r� ICI ICI . .:III �•�,,, Y a TISE DESIGN ASSOCIATES I PLANNING I ARCHITECTURE I PROGRAM MANAGEMENT 65 WASHINGTON ST, SALEM r v w ` y��r 3 - _ � _ f• r �1�1 ` V1 5 `� ♦ �� .. S � r w i� a 1 I I Z ""r Y 1 � Q I ILI III i ml � •1 III lu III 111 It'' i■t �I ■1 t■ 1■t ■ICI■ 1 I�� `;a, v. � � � '"� _ . 1. ea 'I i f�R ��„�t �l�ll .;`��' �l ccr 1 IISE DESIGN ASSOCIATES PLANNING ARCI11l ECTURE PROGRAM MANAGEMENT 65 WASHINGTON ST. SALEM _ I Site Area - 22,440 S.F. Building Area w. Level Enclosed Area Parking ■ P1 880 GSF. 9 , I131 5,300' GSF. 1 4 I (Level 1 16,284 GSF. 18 Level 3-6 64,480 GSF. 4 n (Total 88,944 GSF. 5 'Includes 3000 GSF. Retail ' 1^ I Common Amenities Levels Bathrooms 550 NSF Lobby/Lounge 180 NSF } Fitness Room 500 NSF Meeting/Community Room 685 NSF Terrace (Exterior) 1888 NSF . . T-' Level 2-6 Residential Unit Type Sub Type Area Quantity One Bedroom Type 'A' 1770 NSF. 9 One Bedroom Type 'B' 1885 NSF. 4 ® (Two Bedroom Type 'A' 11062 NSF. 18 �' (Two Bedroom Type 'B' 1280 NSF. 4117 tY (Two Bedroom Type 'C' 11290 NSF. 5 - K', Two Bedroom Type 'D' 11188 NSF. I 10 - (Two Bedroom I Type 'E' I l l57 NSF. I 4 Two Bedroom I Type 'F' 1087 NSF. 5 Three Bedroom I Type 'A' 1520 NSF. I 3 TISE DESIGN ASSOCIATES I PLANNING I ARCHITECTURE I PROGRAMV\ ' Federal St. Federal St. i F T—h MTe G rn a LoEey c - N 3 t Oenpe n _ . I Church St. Church St. vea..prvmK vmme 1.IH6- Grpune Lens 1'e111V loderal St. Federal St- 2HR 2BF 2BR 2BR _2BR 29ft I 2HR 2BR 2BF 2HR 2BR 2em O Library 29 3 Terrace I � — T Exercise 2BR 28F �-- - F "2HR Church St. Church St. Lev12 1'=1H6' Lerel 3-5 p�j/yam 1'•1118' DESIGN ASSOCIATES • • " D in��nnu tir..�n Federal St. Final submission to the SRA is estimated for April 11, 2016. Schedule for local permitting is estimated at 4 to S months beginning January 12th. Estimated construction time is 18 month. Staging plan will be developed as part of a construction management plan to be submitted to the City. "ZBR ZBR ZBR ZBR 3nR W C O W c ISO m a 3 3H- 18R .3BR 7BR YBR Church St. ASSOCIATESTjSE DESIGN • e Ili wo.o tii.n . J Q f Cn Z �jl, • 0 • i [7 2 S N — Q IL I iLl V,_ W � a _ U �d 8 R.i. r•: !� f I a� � F z z Sawa _� —i .• "mil W Q U N Q Z N N W W w J a N F N Z 0 t� I _Z x N a w a � a ' � r u •� u z � z a 3 J I N O , N N .et A Z W T w N_ __ �� MOM .. En �r z Z � I Z e; Q no +I (::i✓J' W - � W V Z ■ Q f L d W C iGl � FYI � CL /AM mw � � Q a z ® W f N f- S .. fy . h '•S1 � W J a ` N - _ Z F l'J � Z a S is' 3 9 0 � 1 i�� w� ■ter,: , � ��' _ r s a 1 u W K J ` F u x U d' a z z a d b W F a N N a Z s y _ W W 1 n y TISE DESIGN ASSOCIATES A ARCHITECTURE PLANNING GROGRAM MANAGEMENT � 65 Washington Street, Salem The current proposal is for a 62 - 64 unit condominium building to be built on the site of the existing Salem District Court property on Washington Street. The developer, Diamond Sinacori LLC, was chosen through an RFP issued by the Salem Redevelopment Authority in 2015. The original design presented by the applicant in support of designation has been revised to improve the overall architectural design, constructability, and financial stability of the project. These changes substantially improve the sub grade parking and overall site preparation involving contaminated soils. Therefore, certain elements of the project have been subjected to redesign, while rigidly adhering to the intent of the original proposal. The fagades of the building have been re-designed to more closely reflect the nature of the historic, older architecture of Salem while still presenting a contemporary and modern feel to the street scape. As such, the updated design is less generic; more contextual with the surrounding architecture, and more appropriate for downtown Salem. The updated design is similar to the original with respect to the basic urban design strategies, building massing, and program of uses. It utilizes the perimeter foundations from the existing courthouse structure, and builds to the property lines on Church, Federal, and Washington Streets. The primary proposed curb cut for residential parking is off Federal Street, and the existing curb cut on Washington Street will be filled in. The existing parking lot adjacent to the courthouse will be incorporated in the new "footprint" of the proposed residential structure. The revised design supports a 1:1 parking ratio with parking spaces located in the re-used first basement of the courthouse plus new enclosed on grade parking under the building at grade. Additional spaces may be leased in the City garage. Retail space on the ground floor starts midway along the building frontage on Washington Street and running south and turning the corner on Church Street. Approximately 3000 s.f. is proposed, potentially sub-dividable into two separate retail establishments. The balance of the ground floor further up Washington Street is taken up by the building's primary residential entrance and lobby, and the fully screened indoor parking on the corner of Federal and Washington Streets. It is important to acknowledge that this urban block is the termination of retail uses at the north end of Washington Street. This distribution of ground floor activities aids in the transition to the residential neighborhood uses to the north. Additionally, there is a 12' - 16' landscaped strip separating the court house property from Federal Street to the north, which the applicant proposes to improve as part of their proposal. This will visually screen the enclosed parking at grade along Federal Street. The building is a six story "platform" structure, built in the style of a "grand hotel" historically associated with the New England coastal area, and within walking distance of an urban train station. The design employs the visual strategies outlined in Salem's Design Guidelines by proposing a ground floor treatment of retail architecture with large expanses of storefront in a framework of stone veneer pilasters and continuous lintels. Above this are four floors of brick veneer and simulated wood rain screen with articulated bays. The sixth floor / penthouse is primarily a full height window wall on Washington Street, and this expression turns the corners at Federal and Church Streets. Behind this change in facade treatment at the sixth floor are three large three bedroom penthouse units. Above this is a deep continuous projecting cornice that follows the sixth floor window wall treatment. This will be illuminated in the evening with LED lighting. Overall height is approximately 68', both to conform with zoning (70') and keep the building out of a high-rise code classification. The building footprint is a "U" shape, wrapping around an interior courtyard at the center of the block. The design proposes decking over the parking in this interior space, and locating a terrace area above for common use of the building's residents at level 2, adjacent to a library/meeting room and a fitness center. These uses will activate the interior courtyard, create a visual foreground for the mid-block dwelling units, and offer residents an important opportunity for outdoor activity. Balconies associated with individual dwelling units were considered along the street scape, but were not deemed appropriate in this urban location. Larger, common amenities, screened from public view, will offer a pleasing alternative. The residential program is very similar to the original proposal, with 13 one bedroom, 46-47 two bedroom, and 3-4 three bedroom residences for a total between 62 to 64 units. Total enclosed interior area (non-parking) is approximately 89,000 gsf. We will be seeking relief from the Salem Zoning Ordinance under a special permit for Planned Unit Developments (PUD) exactly as originally envisioned. The site area, at 22,440 s.f., exceeds the 10,000 s.f. threshold and therefore qualifies. At 68 feet in height, we will be under the 70 foot height limit in the district. Lot coverage will exceed the 50% allowable, and our proposed lot area per dwelling unit will exceed the "as of right" 44 by 18 residences for a total of 62. Our proposed floor area, at 89,000 gsf, is slightly below the original proposal, but still exceeds the 3 to 1 (67,320 gsf) allowed in the district. On parking, we are requesting a reduction in required parking to 1.0 spaces per dwelling unit, with 1 space provided on site and up to an additional 31 spaces leased at the City garage if needed. Given the site's proximity to the train station and downtown amenities, this "transit oriented development" seems well served by this ratio. With the reduced amount of retail space, on site loading facilities are not being proposed, and the site plans assumes curbside deliveries. However, access to the rear courtyard off Church Street is being maintained, both for this proposal and our direct abutters. TISE DESIGN ASSOCIATESi [ lffi n , m Z _ c _ :1 { 1 'i;l' . l �. (� i.p� w M � �! • 1 �1 '�` < 11 JIN l•llli A - —_� ` ..�� it � \i • 3 �; - - _ r ..w� a 11 f ♦ �•.. .1 � �' ' a •'i miiiiiii JOB s� or 41t`y j a: yy e r r N �, 1 • �L ee 'l' �'' �.s .Z •�� 11 use All 0 ' i i ® � {/ y =.,..� p •� a ,tom � , r,�, Y M1 � - r Washington St. MO C I J n m m 'o C777 J a 0 m m d F d �p o. t0 y F m F J W � � N In T� O m d N CD �\ 1 t�J• J / ) r V^► L1 n d �t • F 7 d) C_n O d b N If Washington St. C — — - - - r / co .._- =r 1 . I / r ° v CT N � —n 0 (D m Q ■ CD C — n �i ■ ■ 0 S Q s 3 3 0 -- i m p p 3 7 n c m I m 3 p 33 3 ■ ■ -- o c m 7 A O N o 3 r N _ - � m m o m m I ■ m N 0 0 0 ------- Z Z Z Z Z Washington St. r m CD N N F I -� m X ry CD (D m Q C) z CD a� w m U) m N m m _ 10 M o m N 1 fTl A A -�I dD A Oi Q• m \ _ d T T T ?I m ( O O O � d Washington St. CD < CD cn I A _ m Cn n U) 7" I A N A E £ E f F F 0 0 m o m O m m m m m m m 0 0 0 m m m m m m m m m a *�.• m a n n a n a a n m n O O O O O O W L O O O O O O O O _ '0 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3FL m - 3 u p I m D m m O O Oi D m D m m - D , Oo N Oo t0 O Oi fT O IN -1 O V V 0) O O N Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z y N fp N fn (A 0 0 0 T T T T T T T T T d Washington St. 1 r \ CD CD - - W W W I � � T IV CD 00 - - Q- v CD A , ,a t 1 Cn V/ CD rh M 0 0 r 0 0 0 0 0 0 m m a 'o 00 00 00 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 m m N m m m m m m K 7 v O C) m D m D m O D m v N o � N Oo fT Oo 10 W Ol N O O V V O O O N Z Z Z Z Z Z Z y y m m m m y m m T T A I II, 9 W ut A O O A O _ � I w 14 1.y1f, IIW TISE DESIGN ASSOCIATI ARCHITECTURE PLANNING PROGRAM MANAGEMENT , 65 Washington Street, Salem The current proposal is for a 62 - 64 unit condominium building to be built on the site of the existing Salem District Court property on Washington Street. The developer, Diamond Sinacori LLC, was chosen through an REP issued by the Salem Redevelopment Authority in 2015. The original design presented by the applicant in support of designation has been revised to improve the overall architectural design, constructability, and financial stability of the project. These changes substantially improve the sub grade parking and overall site preparation involving contaminated soils. Therefore, certain elements of the project have been subjected to redesign, while rigidly adhering to the intent of the original proposal. The fagades of the building have been re-designed to more closely reflect the nature of the historic, older architecture of Salem while still presenting a contemporary and modern feel to the street scape. As such, the updated design is less generic; more contextual with the surrounding architecture, and more appropriate for downtown Salem. The updated design is similar to the original with respect to the basic urban design strategies, building massing, and program of uses. It utilizes the perimeter foundations from the existing courthouse structure, and builds to the property lines on Church, Federal, and Washington Streets. The primary proposed curb cut for residential parking is off Federal Street, and the existing curb cut on Washington Street will be filled in. The existing parking lot adjacent to the courthouse will be incorporated in the new "footprint" of the proposed residential structure. The revised design supports a 1:1 parking ratio with parking spaces located in the re-used first basement of the courthouse plus new enclosed on grade parking under the building at grade.Additional spaces may be leased in the City garage. Retail space on the ground floor starts midway along the building frontage on Washington Street and running south and turning the corner on Church Street. Approximately 3000 s.f. is proposed, potentially sub-dividable into two separate retail establishments. The balance of the ground floor further up Washington Street is taken up by the building's primary residential entrance and lobby, and the fully screened indoor parking on the corner of Federal and Washington Streets. It is important to acknowledge that this urban block is the termination of retail uses at the north end of Washington Street. This distribution of ground floor activities aids in the transition to the residential neighborhood uses to the north. Additionally, there is a 12' - 16' landscaped strip separating the court house property from Federal Street to the north, which the applicant proposes to improve as part of their proposal. This will visually screen the enclosed parking at grade along Federal Street. The building is a six story "platform" structure, built in the style of a "grand hotel" historically associated with the New England coastal area, and within walking distance of an urban train station. The design employs the visual strategies outlined in Salem's Design Guidelines by proposing a ground floor treatment of retail architecture with large expanses of storefront in a framework of stone veneer pilasters and continuous lintels. Above this are four floors of brick veneer and simulated wood rain screen with articulated bays. The sixth floor / penthouse is primarily a full height window wall on Washington Street, and this expression turns the corners at Federal and Church Streets. Behind this change in facade treatment at the sixth floor are three large three bedroom penthouse units. Above this is a deep continuous projecting cornice that follows the sixth floor window wall treatment. This will be illuminated in the evening with LED lighting. Overall height is approximately 68', both to conform with zoning (70') and keep the building out of a high-rise code classification. The building footprint is a "U" shape, wrapping around an interior courtyard at the center of the block. The design proposes decking over the parking in this interior space, and locating a terrace area above for common use of the building's residents at level 2, adjacent to a library/meeting room and a fitness center. These uses will activate the interior courtyard, create a visual foreground for the mid-block dwelling units, and offer residents an important opportunity for outdoor activity. Balconies associated with individual dwelling units were considered along the street scape, but were not deemed appropriate in this urban location. Larger, common amenities, screened from public view, will offer a pleasing alternative. The residential program is very similar to the original proposal, with 13 one bedroom, 46-47 two bedroom, and 3-4 three bedroom residences for a total between 62 to 64 units. Total enclosed interior area (non-parking) is approximately 99,000 gsf. We will be seeking relief from the Salem Zoning Ordinance under a special permit for Planned Unit Developments (PUD) exactly as originally envisioned. The site area, at 22,440 s.f., exceeds the 10,000 s.f. threshold and therefore qualifies. At 68 feet in height, we will be under the 70 foot height limit in the district. Lot coverage will exceed the 50% allowable, and our proposed lot area per dwelling unit will exceed the "as of right" 44 by 18 residences for a total of 62. Our proposed floor area, at 89,000 gsf, is slightly below the original proposal, but still exceeds the 3 to 1 (67,320 gsf) allowed in the district. On parking, we are requesting a reduction in required parking to 1.0 spaces per dwelling unit, with 1 space provided on site and up to an additional 31 spaces leased at the City garage if needed. Given the site's proximity to the train station and downtown amenities, this "transit oriented development" seems well served by this ratio. With the reduced amount of retail space, on site loading facilities are not being proposed, and the site plans assumes curbside deliveries. However, access to the rear courtyard off Church Street is being maintained, both for this proposal and our direct abutters. TISE DESIGN ASSOCIATES , , ST, SALEM Los Di. onn Sls.r.• A A, W. DMYONO SIMACORI. LLC, COMMONWFALM LAND TIRE INSURANCE COMPANY AND NO DICERS. BENCHMARK SUMMARY COMMONWEALTH LAND n/LE MBER. OT COMPANY ALTA COMMAM. E NUMBER:, "I MIS K i0 CERTIFY RES THM# DESLRR.IION ELEV. EFFECTIVE WIE:CIPON' RY J, 1016 M6 PfAN IS ME RESULT PERFORMED/N R OR OR Q HYDRANT FIANCE 262) - SCHfDUIE B -SELWN 1 IXCEPRONS MBEIWEEN FESRIMRY T220AN 1£DBRUARY BOLT HYIMANT ITEM 11M9FR DESCRIPTION $EL T [ E., 1OI6 1-6 NOJ SURVEY RELATED M/4 'LAN,AND M£SURVEY ON WHICH R Is l wCr ACREAGE AR64 5 AS SHOWN HOSED WERE MADE IM ACCO XIX W/IH ME 2016 UNIMUM SIANOMVIV Ai.XI D S LONFIRNAIORY 1'MING SURVEYS EOIA FOR NTR/NSPS AND ROE (INTETNOR LOT LINES) BN.S668/PC.2W 9Y Aft SURVEYS NSPS.AND lNC[UDES N�P2L O TMINC BY ME SALLM BKS71J/PC.2M J, 4. x 5(0). 6(e). ](e). 7(B)(1). ](c). 6. 9. RfOfVELOPMENI AUMORRY _ 11. 1A 1a(RON£OBSERVED). 17(NOr CD RCHT Or WAY TO BK6176/PG.SSJ RESEARCHED). 16(NONE OBSERVED). 19. AND CHURCH STREET W(SIM)Of TABLE A MEREOF. OISCOA'nNLMNCE OF PUBLIC BK.6.NSTpG.656 ME SUBJECT PREMISES a LOCATED IN ZONE FEDERAL RI IN SIREET BK65 FOR REtlSIRY USE ONLY 451PC6S9 X(rLM5JU0f0) ARERE.tS DETERMINED IO BE DISCdMNIUNCE OF PUBLIC BK65J6/PC 790 OUTSIDE THE a zx ANNWL CHWCE ® RIGHTS IN CFRJRCH SIREEr BK65761M..794 LEGEND MITTE WRF AS SHOWN ON FLOW INSURANCE P RA 1rAP FOR ME CITY Of SAfO, MOSSACNU ESSEXCOUNTY COMMUNITY PNEL NUMBER 2 50101 OQIEG N.RC At CRAIN KKE(OM) Locus MAP r Wv}be, _ EFF£CITE DATE OF JULY 16. 2074, .'0,)-rr..a $$ SEWER MANHOLE(SVH) MIS PLAN WAS PREPARED IN ACCORMNLE (NOT ID SCAlE) v g QECM/C MNNOLE(EMN) ® WPI NE RECISIE'RSROF DEEDS MTED Yr 976 wHe}�za� P TELEPHONE M.WMIXE(ASH) 8 MO SENSED JMM1WtY 12. IMS.. wHe}r2M Avr-u91 CATCH BASIN(CB) ❑ RECCORVIVOG TO 05925 MIS MC PROPERTY LASES SHOSWO ON wHe}ra wya}rss. I wv-IE9IlBL) FEDERAL STREET RRE HYDRANT v( MI5 PLAN ARE ME LINES OMgNG EXrsn, S .Ev OWNERSHIP. AND ME LINES OF ME STREETS Acn w-2 (PUBIC- VARIABLE MOM)© WGAS GIER gu OR WAYS SHOWN ARE AROSE OF PUBLIC OR -] 5 L, PRNAIE SIREEIS AND WAYS ALR£ADr wHvl-+e>ziy Av- ' Q Lf£ANWr ® ESTABLISHED, ANO MAi NO NEW LINES FOR aElw lAl1 wV-r),y ME OAIWN OF EX2nND OWNERSHIP OR FOR wHel-�eAT mTaeq'MVJ e'W'rT qY 1 LIGHT II N£W WAYS ME!ROW PARKING SUMMARY ® M-Pu q'w°Bi - OeNLOWB-"- --_- --' uvy cwB _ MET ® THE AWVE L£AOFKANON IS INIENUfOro _ _ ________ _.- MEET REGISTRY OF OEM R£OUIRCUE t FOR STANDARD SMALLS 1 B TRANSFORNfR ® ME REWRgNC OF PUNS AND IS NOT A m+0.c'(.W 1 OF Ixv`f w Se PTU O R,OW ER IP HANDICAPPED STALLS 1 - aAM cYwB rwAN ttwB P ACCOROINC TO CURRENT CITY OF SALEM S _ a E) ANgNING PROPERTIES ME SHOWN U / -- ASSESSORS INFORMATON. TOTAL STALLS 17 ' ' ra' r2 . PICK/NC M ® THE ABOVE CERnftEO ro THE BEST OF m\c RIAUI METER YY PRO wK ED PARTIES vYri�z 8 IMND'CMPED PABOW SPICE AN F TO v ` G ®ro•®rB' ®°• �" ®° COI.CREIE 0 AND NO O ME ABOVE MERS v M•Txae `. g•K1-Nears'a5t- rI.LB6'izs� rs',.. _mxi.ul'BPn - BRICK "_-''� L+qr°-g �H.+1e. v :V,°. 0 - _Y/- �"�� WILOINO ALIEN h Muoa ASs0.'MTES. INC. mxi=a»^n T Wz'L1Me 1^ - \f /JJ BUILDING OKBot -•�wea.ew L w uB J SiO,Pr RIGHT Of WAY!TILE ISSUED FOR Ja.A / BRICK BWIfNNG m D9( n w1Y61-lxv✓/ 1w as, I 509'N SST 1'CONIOUR `+ `EB�B.I 71.21 s•COHroUR - -s5- - REVIEW r 1l y'el•ree> � N� PROPERTY LINE AS DESCRIBED 1N COMMOAI E N LW NSURANC£COMPMY NIA I 9IAN 0.RN ueeYPR _ ISAY RCMIY MUST ABUPENS(TILE COMYRMEM NUMBER:01297 EFTCCT RITE FEBRUARY J. M16 • '�m btt�v v© BK.15267/P6.165 CURB y;' PA'a`T°£°°) MAIEp LM•E ALLEN R MAJOR ASSOCMTES, INC wAn,0A9 r r. FOWMER PRM£RYY A CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND, W91H ME BUNDINOS MEREON SHWIED AT LINE P£R PUN SEWER LINE ME CORNER OF CHURCH STREET MD WM#WlOV STREET IN SAID SALEM. g 0 0 _ le '1 Boor 135. PLAN B ORNN LTNE BEING SHOWN AS PARCEL M-3 ON A PLAN ENRILED. 'PROPERTY PLAN, �, AKR a GAS LINE PIN' M1E IIfSWOWL PR2IEC/NO, MASS R-95 HERIfAGE PUZA EAST, SAD/REDE4ELOPMENr I'-- °}Y PAAm 3- -6 - .o '- '- iatta rl ego- AUMDWTY, SCALE: I•- !O. MIED CGRJBER 2. 19]4, WN(TMW Q IgWARO, MS ELECTRIC LINE APPLXWR\AWVT✓FN ® tl' d i_ �- LCC 17132E INC.. EMGM•EERS AND ARCH/lErrs' Bg1HDED AND DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS 0.e > __ TELEPHONE LINE DIAMOND SINACORI,LLC WESTERLY BY WASHINGTON STREET, ONE HUNDRED SIXTY-FIVE AND 7 -Trt.mer m-2e.eB x r al FOOIPRIM AREA EPA 7 HARCOURT STREET 6/IDO(165.06)FEET; ® O9:�': n.r RasHED nWR ELEwrroM FEE 60STON,MA 02716 NgTMERLY BY PARCEL RC-2. M SHOWN ON SAID P/,W. ONE HUMORED 1 Fa LarYOF$AI.E'M _ ,>I O BUILDING IEICHI BH FORn-MRfE MD e6/1W(14111)T£fr.' AssF33OR5 PA m 0(]O tltltl q S H PWOkR: Els2w[r BY PARCEL RC-2. PARCEL P-I ANO PARCEL R-2.AS R a 9/IVM/NOUS BIT. SHOWN ON SAID PLAN. A MW DISTANCE OF ONE HUNDRED I AFEA=2244055.F' s,m-SIX ANO r9/1W(I66.18)FEET, I o :•'. (0.5ft ACJ a;u B 2 STORY CONCRETE CONC. SOUMERLY BY CHURCH STREET. ECHRFN AND 12/1M(rd12) FEET,' L� ! II yl BRICK SUILgNC cRAroIE wM. 65 WASHINGTON STREET WESIFRLr BY PARI;EL R-ZA AS SHOWN OM SAID PLW. FORTY-AINE Y - }I z srMORr E'E-nss c . ET�T6.6J s - sil•5O's4t M170M CENTER (BC) SALEM,MA AND 6B/IW(49.68)F£Et $ SOUMERLY BY SA10 PARCEL R-TA A'TOTAL&STANCE OF RfIY AND AM` R BRICK BUILDING X T w BY }}} 94.9 REINFORCED CONCREI£PIPE RGP I4/IW(50.14)fEfT, -iO1 H FPA�IIJJ]ESF 1.� �\ NMIAED CUY PIP£ K FASIERLY BY SARI PARCEL R 2A F?I1'-iWD MO IJ/100(52.4J) \L N/! ASBESTOS CLAY PIP£ AC PIOORR ILO. 219601 PATE 03/02/16 f£FT, SBJ'24'40w M CHURCH STREET LLC SOUMERLY Br CHURCH S7RER.A /OTN DISTANCE Oi NINETY M0 O ' J9.91' Blr JM6J/P0250 ND PIPES VISIBLE NPV 51/fOO(W.5I)FEE! y' ./I�N TOP OF waRR 11Y SCAIE I'-2tl DWE NAME SS1S101ALTA SAID PARCEL CON/AMM1YG I2.440 SOUAR£FEET OF LAND ACCORgNC 1p SAID (LS ± rTi I _ _PARgC P OB . )0.2Jww SAID V I PMQt-raO �T/506JI��B'E ND6-11117w R FORMERLY WE PIMPIATE)BY PLA OMFl®BY: FAC Q[OO.D 01". CX SUBJECT TO A RESERYAIION /0 A RKMT Of WAY M OELINFA>EO OIL SAD I `/rIW-Ta.T 1 5' IpRY 1 / 49.W PAGE PG. PLAN FOR RIF BEHEST OF ME LINO NEXT TO MD ABU'NINC SAID PARCEL \j / SSE23'11W wrveMec) BeIRiOIW N�WIB 1- I' OF LAND HEREIN COANCYED AND SHOWN AS PARCEL R-2 AND PARCEL P-I a I A w MO PARCEL R-1A MD BIRCH RIGHT OF WAY rs 10 BE USED"VC?lt 52 56pOBJ1 w _ FAST INOM GROUP, L<C LOCUS REF2FENCES BUILDINGS PRESSEENRANY SITUAOD M PARCELS R�MOS F-ZASSAID(RICH 0" H aEI g I w ntr 4599' C Bx.14950/PC 469 -CITY OF Stl£Y ASSESSORS'S PARCEL JS-06W-I _ T -OEEO BOOK 6175. PACE 556 WAY BEING BWNDW AND DESCRBED AS FOLLOWS' '� - ..._- WOK 140, PUN 76 ALLEN & MAJOR ,Q u1 e- � r]y'E I� a} � 'cae wx .� PInN REPERE7+cfs SrNRM£RLY BY CHURCH SASE£/, $HTEEN AND rI/IDO(IN 12)FEET. 1 i• + dAx aPe MESIERLY BY PARCEL R-K AS SHUNO ON SAID D AND A PORTION Ci ASSOCIATES, INC. OF PARCEL RC-J, ON£HUNDRED ILTL AND l/IW(11001) -PUN BOOK 1J5 PLAN 8 FEETMM �� \ -PLAN BOOK IJS, PLAN 9 •Lil B utvemrvl evi...L-d-IT runglv8 NONMERLY BY THE RQLANING PWnON OF PIRC£L RC-J. MIRTEE'N MD _ -PLW BOOK 151. PLAN 16 env mvmal mvmMiee.6edrnve va6Rccmee 91/IW(13..91)JLL/,- MV - �5_ -LOG 171329 ..I 1.. EASTERLY BY PARCEL P-1 AND PARCEL R-2 M SHOWN ON SMD mTaa°(NAn _ ® v IW cOMYERGE WAY PLAN, ONE HUNDRED NINE AND 97/!W(109.97)TEFL >'• ^ I Yu NO]FB P.O.BOX IILI mXl t!(MntE-- V WOBVR\MAVItBB-0IIB _- I. NORM ARROW IS BASED ON MASSKNUSETS GRID COORDIWlE TEL TICS 1.44. Ivor-Taal -TAa CHURCH STREET SYSR1(AMMLMD ZONE) (IUD BJ) PAx:U6u fu.,Bs° rnmxNM•v) wwazm wMoYr0.n 2. BWK/PAGE ANO PUN REFERENCES ME IM£N FROM MIDDLESEX .uvv[�.un v Ln[Yrrue.en . vv.urnnrn,nn Ar wwe)•rAn _ VARIABLE WIOMJ m (SWM)REOISOA OF 0£FOS IN GMBRIWE. AM (PUBLImneXliH ]. VERTICAL MIWB 5 AWw BB �@p4MA�R gMO19�A�TNRMAl4lMT. 4. CONIMUR INTERVAL IS ONE roor(1). Ap,TAOQVpR WMYS Y09[OPGIBY6WMI(iE11L 5. DRAINAGE SYSTEM WAS rTKL OF WATER AT THE TIME Or SURVEY. MMM.Rea PRasM MR."9`P3PX Un£m'SYATIDNENI' IMF LlIoON MO M HEREON SHOUL ME BASOER£DPON RECORD E ORIE AIBIICATRMro1MWn[ct.tR[l9MgIBTIML I1WTnF MYA2IKPIPBMM.W IMYRBRYII®Vf11E1RCNMlV OI 0110MAA.AVBI BM.AAPmmX Am NCEMV,MB,AML ME 67111nES SHOWN HAVE BEEN LOCArEO FROM RQD SURVEY INFORAMI)ON AND D'ISRN6 ORAWM'FS. ALLEN& BRWAn9HaTIEt1Rr1BBlI5MElrrOmww GRAPHIC SCALE MmlA llwl®MPMmrtATar¢anRwuvww Mn MAJOR ASSOCATCS, INC. (A&M)MAKES M CWRANICE �� Tq PGSV.dR[PAOCVCT¢�p TOT IIIE UnMiS SHOWN HEREON COMPRISE ALL SUCH UTILITIES W ME MCA EIMER/N SERKCE OR ABANDONED dMwwG 9HINu A&M FURTHER DOES MOr WMRAN7 RNr AT UnlRIES my PP ME LL ME EXALT LE UNON INDICATED A&M H45 I _n rn o I fl ALTP./N$PS , NDr PHYyG11Lr LOCATED Mf UNDERGROUND ununEs. A LAND TTTLL SURVEY M\PAtl.II:IS12rPe<r\BV.RLY\MMwK515-�2r r�>k�AB y � ' u..,..�..r '- . - O J �I f 'I�.•' l � 1 � iL Z >r � I(_I I I �111 �. �'.. }'. � 1 ■ ~ /�' I •Ire T_ ' ? � -J � 1 � I � 1. as. VW . 'I r� �' ,x• '�; 1 • ICI 1�1 r I I�� lk t �1!c I Ari in IL Ll m .. �•` 1 II , .1 J -`, I ►. �_ " ..� -•� ..,row •• •. '' or •�c.F " e. f A ..4 ,'• t y yam. �' a� � &Iro + � �'1 • • 1, �© oil 7,s` MEN EWA ��' I�111� � xl3. J Washington St . a < f/! I ■ r — _ c oy v G) -n ' * CD m ■ (D ��- - - — ■ U) 1 n ■ m m P 4 3 o- m 0 N OO O C 0 v � 7 0 o O O r 3 m m p ao m o ao ut Z Z Z Z Z I Washington St . i r m \ N N ti N m -- -- I r � - z m S U CCD N N � -- to A o m m 6 < < < n (D aD m m m w w N A O A cn y a Q 0 G) G) T w w w m G7 m A \ _ w F T m A m A w m \ _m Washington St. W Is � i I t� N — I z A 'I 3 a TI — v r m o 0 0 0 0 o m m ,y- I m a a a a s a a a m N ._ •_- - I -_- i _� -__ I d O O O O O O O O O O O O O O .4 °0 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 m ji, 3 m a m D m Z Z � A Z Z 2 2 Z Z Z m m m m 71 m m ,Tmi .Tmi T T T T T T T I D c Washington St . < CD \ I w w w ao m m rl Q I cn v C/) I � m a N N � £ f E F E E n m R m A m 0 0 0 0 0 0 m m m m m m m m m m m m o N m n n n a a n a n m 0- 0 00 00 0 0 0 0 'o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ o 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 m 3 y m Y m TI ❑1 O O m > OU D m O D Oo J m O m JJ Z Z Z Z Z Z Z y y y y y y dl y T T - ?I T 7 T ?I 7n T T O c � V � o \ T I S E UI \.1. q . GR5�ku-1 U ARCHITECTURE PLANNING PROGRAM MANAGEMENT I ffll � 65 Washington Street, Salem The current proposal is for a 62 - 64 unit condominium building to be built on the site of the existing Salem District Court property on Washington Street. The developer, Diamond Sinacori LLC, was chosen through an RFP issued by the Salem Redevelopment Authority in 2015. The original design presented by the applicant in support of designation has been revised to improve the overall architectural design, constructability, and financial stability of the project. These changes substantially improve the sub grade parking and overall site preparation involving contaminated soils. Therefore, certain elements of the project have been subjected to redesign, while rigidly adhering to the intent of the original proposal. The facades of the building have been re-designed to more closely reflect the nature of the historic, older architecture of Salem while still presenting a contemporary and modern feel to the street scape. As such, the updated design is less generic; more contextual with the surrounding architecture, and more appropriate for downtown Salem. The updated design is similar to the original with respect to the basic urban design strategies, building massing, and program of uses. It utilizes the perimeter foundations from the existing courthouse structure, and builds to the property lines on Church, Federal, and Washington Streets. The primary proposed curb cut for residential parking is off Federal Street, and the existing curb cut on Washington Street will be filled in. The existing parking lot adjacent to the courthouse will be incorporated in the new "footprint" of the proposed residential structure. The revised design supports a 1:1 parking ratio with parking spaces located in the re-used first basement of the courthouse plus new enclosed on grade parking under the building at grade. Additional spaces may be leased in the City garage. Retail space on the ground floor starts midway along the building frontage on Washington Street and running south and turning the eorner on Church Street. Approximately 3000 s.f. is proposed, potentially sub-dividable into two separate retail establishments. The balance of the ground floor further up Washington Street is taken up by the building's primary residential entrance and lobby, and the fully screened indoor parking on the corner of Federal and Washington Streets. It is important to acknowledge that this urban block is the termination of retail uses at the north end of Washington Street. This distribution of ground floor activities aids in the transition to the residential neighborhood uses to the north. Additionally, there is a 12' - 16' landscaped strip separating the court house property from Federal Street to the north, which the applicant proposes to improve as part of their proposal. This will visually screen the enclosed parking at grade along Federal Street. The building is a six story "platform" structure, built in the style of a "grand hotel" historically associated with the New England coastal area, and within walking distance of an urban train station. The design employs the visual strategies outlined in Salem's Design Guidelines by proposing a ground floor treatment of retail architecture with large expanses of storefront in a framework of stone veneer pilasters and continuous lintels. Above this are four floors of brick veneer and simulated wood rain screen with articulated bays. The sixth floor / penthouse is primarily a full height window wall on Washington Street, and this expression turns the corners at Federal and Church Streets. Behind this change in facade treatment at the sixth floor are three large three bedroom penthouse units. Above this is a deep continuous projecting cornice that follows the sixth floor window wall treatment. This will be illuminated in the evening with LED lighting. Overall height is approximately 68', both to conform with zoning (70') and keep the building out of a high-rise code classification. The building footprint is a "U" shape, wrapping around an interior courtyard at the center of the block. The design proposes decking over the parking in this interior space, and locating a terrace area above for common use of the building's residents at level 2, adjacent to a library/meeting room and a fitness center. These uses will activate the interior courtyard, create a visual foreground for the mid-block dwelling units, and offer residents an important opportunity for outdoor activity. Balconies associated with individual dwelling units were considered along the street scape, but were not deemed appropriate in this urban location. Larger, common amenities, screened from public view, will offer a pleasing alternative. The residential program is very similar to the original proposal, with 13 one bedroom, 46-47 two bedroom, and 3-4 three bedroom residences for a total between 62 to 64 units. Total enclosed interior area (non-parking) is approximately 89,000 gsf. We will be seeking relief from the Salem Zoning Ordinance under a special permit for Planned Unit Developments (PUD) exactly as originally envisioned. The site area, at 22,440 s.f., exceeds the 10,000 s.f, threshold and therefore qualifies. At 68 feet in height, we will be under the 70 foot height limit in the district. Lot coverage will exceed the 50% allowable, and our proposed lot area per dwelling unit will exceed the "as of right" 44 by 18 residences for a total of 62. Our proposed floor area, at 89,000 gsf, is slightly below the original proposal, but still exceeds the 3 to 1 (67,320 gsf) allowed in the district. On parking, we are requesting a reduction in required parking to 1.0 spaces per dwelling unit, with 1 space provided on site and up to an additional 31 spaces leased at the City garage if needed. Given the site's proximity to the train station and downtown amenities, this "transit oriented development" seems well served by this ratio. With the reduced amount of retail space, on site loading facilities are not being proposed, and the site plans assumes curbside deliveries. However, access to the rear courtyard off Church Street is being maintained, both for this proposal and our direct abutters. TisE DESIGN ASSOCIATES I PLANNING ARCHITECTURE I PROGRAMWASHINGTON I)I�M01:P,SIN�,PRI TDA Washington St. a Q y S I I I ■ Q i m Q ■ CD U I ■ ■ cn N w r o c m w m 3 3 m 3 ■ ■ ';I m o w i 0 I m rn a � ut m ao o m N Z 2 2 Z Z II N N N N N -- T T T T T O1 - Washington St. r m m — N � I i X N CD fD r w _ Q 0 CD ncn _ m =r CD -, f!J 0 - - m N � d < < ww `m cm n m m — 1° m D , m N 1 m N fn A � A m A m m C A N O O m y A m m O n T A O A n G7 ?i D _ir m N N fn N m � � I Washington St. W I I N N N A � � CD CL / I - • i Irj ,ji>; i" CD n OD a m c - - - - (n N It r A III E E E F F 0 0 0O � • __ m 0 0 0 0 o m � m c a n n n n 0 I n 'o O 'o o 'o o 'o 'o o� 7+ . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ` 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 m w `A - il m mmm � mmm � m .� _ I D 'n m r I 03 ' z z z z z z z y y A II m m N m m m m r T - ._ T p II c Ql ) Washington St . !P — W I A i rk I N � � Q �► .� A cD — C Cn lI I V/ rrt N � E f f f f f ° z m A l0 m m C m O m m m �. m m m m m m m m m m n 2 n ¢ n n a a m N m 'o o 'o o e) 0 ' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 m 11 3 m q 1 m m m m m m m m m K 7 D T m O O to D ao D m q 2 Z Z Z Z Z Z N m T T T T T T T O IMF -4/9 LAM Pi&t A QX mr z T i 1APP . ......... DIAMOND SINACORI REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT N IX4Igl0 SlH!^WL LL�[CMMGNNEkIII IANQ Ultf bSURwt[COYpaim w0 NJ 6ENCHMAFK$UMMAAY � LOMMpxwrµM UNG FI34 INSY/AANCE f.MAFANv OrryLR$. LIA COMMIINENT IIUMHEF QIYPI S K i0 CEMIIY r 4f' I TBMp E)EBYRIP/ION F1EY.� EIRtDY£IN'rC:R.9P.WRY S,aill6 r [ /I Y]RAxr!L4'!Gf SCHEYK'L b- STIHIn 1 fXEE'110Y5 - '/5 N IS C AETUti L AN AC NN rMI t IIIIU la` L\ M'y!n2 = l• tfMilwmr I/ipY Rom[ tl1.1On JTE8Al1 FY 1�$J6 AN(!�£B6ULPI AE I-a NO,FIJRYIY AEIA2P 0111 A(-FN AN , rr SURVEY ON W 4Y,R'fs &V U WCAf MAv M ACS'J9AWCE At MC EUtr In:HFA6' A.CLJ 5 AS YIWH 201.YrWNUL III. ® CjYOMIIFEIxWDIIFT nL.PO�r II Rlr azre/aa]a HSfVIA AI.IE FIA$ANNolN1N S0.Y 3A yYG "NNq..IINVNNI II,,,:IkF+AJ'6rz,'E RY$C A ""TANnlAP e g:D tNFI iI Rr n1E>1 6(n1. iEN)(". xlm.aY[ r xHx:r V_ rJ IshnavE cBsIRM1EoEE r>6w.I AWTT Y M ro RCS('111 UNE01M DJ. IN,ANn E wr«sm`-r ao(trM)a;AaLf A rxeRmr. WBLY,NIIN14WL'E CI srw If 8,&,. ... MC UBIf.Cl r:4EM�EES 6`LCGrfD u!ZUNF, O p i5 IN RllE.W S/R£n BR.E543/PG659 I'OR aYpSIRY USE IXkY (xfMQEP) I,INI NIE CN/N,, r0 4E .`NIWLUILE Or INEEI WW)6/.x:lSO O MVt 1FE O s . I Mow I® sc`us p.eHNACH sram ar Ws%/PD.N. I LEGEND � �R�fors Mlmrwx pY FL�M,IIvsuMNDe / MAssAc/+u5[ns mts cvuvrr cow"', mMn}aev L / G4ilx WxNC((IOMI/) NIiF I.X`=lE.1)aii Nt AN LOCUS MAP xm)•rr. sEW£R vw.AP;wNJ ® rws Ptvl w,ts P,vCPAFEv m ActoHvwser (ns: :c srsr. �u4. g` afcmrc AUNNoIE(EMx) M1)II IIIC HULLS IN HLCWrWNS Ol"IN, Iry str. FLYl31wi 0!UEFD9 G/En,nttt Y 1, 19'/6' \�a! cIvNNONE YANNOLE�uxJ O oral Rftirstu s�Hwxr ra. rsee xwf h sa GTn 8a51N ICB) C "WN).. INCM Q 1 AND SN PP FEDERAL STREET IN,x,DH T �c °wTM ° �,wE"o D x,a FlWMISNIP,ANU ME(INa III III IINI S _ GS GF! UR WAYS 9'..AAE ll.Y CF `w 11 EN `IA'r III emsrw or rxrstu awxE l MH FVR PARPMVG SUMMARY ->li"w�Pw: 'Y o wAN N.'r. - - - - - - x..x,.,Ae - mE[ p Nirwlr&Aeow 1,ERrcra N,,N Is I'M",I rt1 - _ - �" WIT �' MEET AFW51RY Or t£LD RFWIR w"NH SraxoAAHmSrAr,v 16 e S 6 �_ - rRnNSluufA DL enEcIIE,. vvr( rI �oNNrrm,, I'/ANWGAAPm.a?ALLS / A�Ni P ig ME�FRNs tF uvxlrvR wrLL TOTAL STALLS 17 �;ml a, T wAu - rl NmcAv MMP n ActoavlNa m plAx(NN pTr vP vtfu .i91�\ _ rXaf NL Mf eP ASSL]3MS IiWORWrKAV .11ING S ACt B +Ht.VXsYF/f CE4MK0 N iX(b[S L`F IV V ANU DFl/f��FON ME A� µfYEO F x•rAm. av INN ND onlElrs R�-xQrrasOs£- +use )/-, saFn t _ s law- C -'7 Aurx s ua;m Assvlrzs Irc M1r- .sor:'w >1 ' n IJ- auw Nt OVEAnLMI .. . or c3 yA QR vIULQNI ur D W LIN: - - ISSUED FOR xNa1-l+^l +(30a• L `tr 1UPM SSF PYIN4 REVIEW xMl-I[ .�- �r 11.21 5 CYVirOU C.,EVI wao-rem;u �w y -.� v I ee -f�iq g HO PrrooeF r Er - _ _ `M'�'sf°1e 1dx"LNON a �3 .a,Tnm tl As 4Ettem(v rn crMuuvwutrx lam NNE INs(rl a tow Ittr kn xnx.!w4 $,n '3[x_ rs.v.11.11V tcwrul,CN Wl a11b>fl2� GIE rE¢a,MHY J.11:1 '- `wU,) ax s1 F/ lGs wRQ gldl>b�.R(-L '3aT51�Tpp FdNNLR!'RWEF/Y IN,FR TINE LLLfM1'9 NN(l.4 455PCY�i MY A CEMAIN APCE( OF IAND WIM iNE QUY:UWf.S IHFA(.ON,SIFWlFO Al 1 - I 1/�L Ni IYN P+AN +FWER LINL rIYL C wtp 0l Ct1UfllH ST.NEEr ANU WAAVINVR)N Si l YN SWI WE,,. # a � nv'[va�a� ` � / 9,T# }5 PL x,, 4` Y t NE _ .14 SVONH AS IMrKEt/!C-1 ON .FxINZW.. M1AY)PExry vLW. ffi ' - R / -. LIN[ l M1V ItIZ fl AS NEW.1J GP. ,EI,RFDEKLCPYEM �` tTr� I GS PRU Kfr• elf URIOxIr. SEAL£ r • W SI'm p[YUAEP 2 It,". oNNNN!XORWf{ € I V X1 ItImlL I'llA1hKAx1�pN¢k /NG, Ewl"ER'I ANn ARCIIIN E 5'CWINO(L M.bESCMAEn AS FCLLEIW, OA I.CC IJI3dB t f se x _ -_ rEtEPInNE uxf DIAMOND SINACORI,LLC wrsNiLY qI wAyNMp+y!sRK[r.GWF MUNQRb 111ry-fM1f AND ^ - •-x aH - - F'.prPRNr taG :Y rn. a 7 STON. A STREET IvcRr.eRL er -I(L m 1 e w w qv vai Pyw.oxP Huxwrzv i�; [ crrvov SALrM ©® „'� IINISXm rLGrt+x atvAlroN BOSTON,MA 02176 1pAn I.R AND 11, a (IU.Q81 FEED. W �J .}P Aa5E3WR5 PARCEL 3506�0 'q' aurIDIHL'NF/FJIr 9N (ASTERtr B WRCCI RC d FlpkLQ P-I IN,PACE NNE AS I ARFA_22.<9O35F },' EI'`Af, lJ &IUMINOVS MOACN SIroNW Mr S,ID A/l A " 03tANCF OI OM eHMMN t fQE11 Ac.1 b Y [ONCR(lE s s r.tv5 `l.--E N mo 11. �. s ll SOJME4. aY"lVf, ,- pp m Ax0 n/em Ile+r)xr(r, 3 Lf I Q 'R autmve "'E0E c(+AN 65 WASHWGTON STREET wtsrEAtr Rr P xeL R-aa,ns s/roxN(w sam PlAra,evRn-r.`wE U) 1 d^N'.+I� +re-ties M1a. IH rK sr r•w'se[ QF/ITVM crxrzR feel 141EM.MA Alm ao/Im Heeal Fri vl 3 ss+cxsmnams am /sa s> SQURKAL a,SAO NM a Rae.A mw rmlIN IE v rrm pAb loll r /�^.�I.- ✓ RL HPJNC(D C'J.M'AER N>' R'P r4/Ica(w rsl lar. LI ).]nie' ' ` I T ENMNIY IN s M.1- mn-txo uro 111.(S1.4J) \ r} t• '- .®\I N'RIIED Alc PVt ✓t maxcrxv. +lswl Dore. o3MLlc 30U+HIRL dY CXWIX.VY e1RFEr.A fIIlAL dSTMSE GF NINnY M'Q N/F A5e6 OS Cur YIFC AC Shc'a4'40W Jp CnUHCN$rN(Cr:LLL SI/ICO(9A51}rE[! 1 (I b ]9.91' al 8✓SSt6J/YL aSO vY wAWe- rW SGIE 1'-ltl CNY.X/.ME SI19MI4iA PMCfI CDMAVLHG 11.qQ.WINE 6Ex,N UNp AIXQRGNO(O Silp 1` l-- 9®_ _ "J4 8£ rOSJ• ww aH f NIINLY N 5A10 ( Fp)0 7 OR4RRm M: KAC CMfIXE➢9Y'. KIK PLW. bO X'N NUe] ROAN eR. SUR:2cI RI A A£ Ir w TO A AgIIT(F WAY A$OELMfLTFO 9N SWO I -mT a s�pg JlW 44 ES'/I J PALE r5 p.(N rM RC gNfrrl aF I/E La NO IEXr r0 A40 A2WNING SY0 PAx(£t \ RR R OF LiMJ IkApx cOrMYEU AN,S M AS PMCFL R-a ANR PIMr[ P r ; J"+1W BUt CN 181a w0 PARCr[A-1A ME,W X.0,Ct"Ur WAv IS N RF URfU FM IN"Ill - � 44.5a e4'eC1 �( A RF ANa AS A PEUfSN IAN W'ALNWAV AND tUR ME PURPOSE OF SENWIING IIN r� -4 IW EASI dMU(AJIIM @(IRdNCS PxfSEMGV$!1W(ED UN r`ARELS R-)ANU R-M SAID RINHT Gl- S V I $ ISY .jAa { G'R 4N'/a - - rY 0, iA1FM 0.4[ROPS'S PARf.Et}S-n60L Mr SUIa dMtlUKP Mm DffCt•Y8E0 AS FSpt IXVS �" _ E RMR RIPE,PATE 5" sDUrRmnY (S 0 AN't 198En -- NA m-: .w.a.w Yn A LL E N '& MAJOR IGMrFCn mo IP/1.(rb'laf rm, � ,� �a r c�r6 0 I� �, IVI$rrRLY DC TAWE1.R-1A AA ALNWN ON SAN HAN AND A MR1111 - pw r as �'M E' ar PAvctt W-.t Lwe lVNwO¢N AND iirao(Ira Dn � I]s N,AN e ASSOCIATES INC. N ERL Hf w.NNc m+IIIN PAttn Rc-1 m:4¢Ex w.: I 1Y - - $ RiAN� 5� Iv iN is ....,.,,.i.e 1 1 a 1 a 1 a..niu:�M y m. N aM,.,ae '. IcIlb] • 1 n USILRCr 8Y PAfgCI P-I AWn'!^pRCLC lI-Z AS SNn4N PY SAIQ �"-nr+rH l I1 ll,kM ONE NUNOR[E NINE AW 91/I00(I0e.971 FSEI >/ _ n, _ m.r. II; rI r, B�3aaAwN/xP)w AGRR[ca qWrsN T0I s PU�N1 (I N w CHURCH STREET SS,M(MND 10f (I RRMCDN C8GEGS, K, uflost A NC r+ m.Kx w c xxvrr,tIN nu aw Nw H owN.o�aM a.YYem v) J N ,n, N m'NN4 rE 'NNE Cor.ip/ i' !_vAN 2 W2 KV:I:'i N�imgy p ,ntyWar.Amngrl ynt 5 P.1.1c$SrN W N(L O!WATER.T III IIMC O 11R1EY ..Il IlNmWN IRA. pI ARf. P!IIn M[p.rgwywawwwnaw wK W rOa L[Oc IIPDN HCf.ORn ATXF•IAN�tl N6rM14tr,�lOnft ARNIW MsrM NI E"Ill"E5�LmWN MK Q(CN LDG.III AFi`r::r INFOHWIP(JN ANb.CN04L9 B(CONSIUEFEQ APapy/µeR OMMY.xLBrluAYaT.ca IKn NAYMAYMMa[Au� SURnS"MFNR'wN"'ANN ExfanNI7 DNAWmc, I GRAPHIC SCALE Iwr. wl m.mea onwu.xo�lw .4N?A-1.. ..W[ (AkM)MAKt I9MwA ®AOSVLLK[TF ptYI¢tOAO[OFESM RNr F.5 N 11111 III NE IN G H P 1 M ^ SW/.R MCSv2wFKAW4r A&M lII IN nIL U l WA 1N I I NCE I Ill �T-�-•rrr��'i wLrt vo AkM FURMfF LPI Hpf WApRAM rIH I E � SNI 1 N W(I4 CUn LOS4'fCN NGIf u. RtMN'4} :f:1 xvr PHrsrw,w.rr rry .Nr uxxx.Hwxn,mums ..�� _n I. ATL S LAND TIREE SURVEY 1 c.azse sea watt. F � �y e.rur 1 _ , ri' pi 9111 lil ', ��► l �•.z. �: j f III ►II !i III Iil I I TISE DESIGN ASSOCIATES PLANNING I ARCHITECTURE I PROGRAM MANAGEMENT 65 WASHINGTON ST, SALEM Wiwi ii ?ii iii oil Nis iiii i ills' ml �n 111 1n NII Nis , nl In X i�l i i 6 ulI m it i R I., pip 44 r bo WE off TISE DESIGN ASSOCIATES PLANNING ARCHITECTURE I PROGRAM MANAGEMENT 65 WASHINGTON ST, SALEM Sl r y„s 1 .,ELL. t • "• t a'\ �5. =' �r •, { ` - -_j(•� •fi r' -: -..� N 1 '�;4{ 77TT ,iil[y r Y 11 1� all tw �� -- ..... its tea.--.y � •G11 �t:l�5d'� 1 ' � � pry♦¢ ... • � JS_ 4 � r a • TISE DESIGN ASSOCIATES PLANNING I ARCHITECTURE I PROGRAM MANAGEMENT 65 WASHINGTON ST, SALEM I N y• �V' J 1. RAIN SCREEN DECORATIV- BRICK y$� •ING STONE 3 COMPOSITE .• STONE II r, e„ _ � f �� I■I� I I��.:].l.��t I '_.: L i r. � /� I I � r �j ��•��.� {!�p�3 y�.. ...a _�� aaa��s.ar�c �i`I�� a'1. � _._ _ �i d � / I�� ' 1yf►/ '-- a � I_ - 'R � A TISE DESIGN ASSOCIATES I PLANNING I ARCHITECTURE PROGRAM MANAGEMENT 65 WASHINGTON ST, SALEM � �n�z Site Area - 22,440 S.F. Building Area Federal St. Level Enclosed Area Parking P1 880 GSF. 9 G1 5,300* GSF. 4 Level 1 16,284 GSF. 18 Level 3-6 64,480 GSF. 4 Total 88,944 GSF. 5 *Includes 3000 GSF. Retail Common Amenities Levels Bathrooms 550 NSF _ Lobby/Lounge 180 NSF _ Fitness Room 500 NSF in Meeting/Community Room 685 NSF Terrace (Exterior) 1888 NSF y 3 Level 2-6 Residential of Unit Type Sub Type Area Quantity One Bedroom Type 'A' 770 NSF. 9 One Bedroom Type 'B' 885 NSF. 4 I Two Bedroom Type 'A' 1062 NSF. 18 Ga ado Two Bedroom Type 'B' 1280 NSF. 4 Two Bedroom Type 'C' 1290 NSF. 5 Two Bedroom Type 'D' 1188 NSF. 10 Two Bedroom Type 'E' 1157 NSF. 4 Church St. Two Bedroom Type 'F' 1087 NSF. 5 Three Bedroom Type 'A' 1520 NSF. 3 Ground Level 1'=1/16• TiSE DESIGN ASSOCIATES PLANNING ARCHITECTURE PROGRAM MANAGEMENT 65 WASHINGTON ST, SALEM K'S D i nuonn SIN,11 OR -r t �- - T.V TISE DESIGN ASSOCIATES PLANNING ARCHITECTURE I PROGRAM MANAGEMENT 65 WASHINGTON ST, SALEM Federal St. Federal St. 1 ZBR 2e 2BR 2BR - 2BR -- 2BR _ 28- 29 2sR 2BR _ J I 3BR N I N c ' c c c L 2d m N -- -. .- 3s" 1BR 'I BR 2BR 1 lw i. S a 3BR 2B Church St. Church St. Level 3-5 1'=1/16' Level 6 TiSE DESIGN ASSOCIATES PLANNING ARCHITECTURE PROGRAM MANAGEMENT 65 WASHINGTON ST, SALEM D inmanu tii�� oei Y y i I I f TISE DESIGN ASSOCIATES PLANNING ARCHITECTURE PROGRAM MANAGEMENT 65 WASHINGTON ST, SALEM lip cbt Salem, Massachusetts LosSalem District Courthouse Redevelopment The Salem Downtown Renewal Plan WMI flct, � 1 �!lYC��I6�h �� . _ M •M 1 , t L: 5� d•.. �r r Nam, ' -. , � -� i •f � � �14IOL r 40 Ira ILI mb le Vol Ar Washington Street 1 ;q L 1 I'J1r7/I Salem District Courthouse Redevelopment cbt Salem, Massachusetts Design AOF JAI 'gig 14 t ) 1 y ~ J - r pie. e. �;• • Site Plan FEDERAL STREET �.I Ej dl �• ill fir l� � I �I�nJI w O -Z �- CHURCH STREE' � i NDF FFEF1 I First Level FEDERAL STREET . PROGRAM KEY: 1. One Bedroom - 2. Two Bedroom — r_, r_� 1 10 3. Three Bedroom I I I 4. Residential Lobby 1 I I 18 2 8 11 5. Bevator Core , _i I L 6. Retail I 3 7, Surface Parking � b L � 8. Loading/Receiving 1 4 9. Speed Romp 14 10. Club Room 5 - 11. Fitness 9 6..— 7 15 I 1 12. Roof Deck r 13. Roof Top MEP 7 16 ' 14. Flat Roof - 15. Parking 4 8 17 16. Setback Terrace 17. Storage )Tenant) W - _ 9 18 18. Mechanical z 19 0 z X 20 x a \ 21 it CHURCH STREET Ground Floor PROGRAM KEY: 1. One Bedroom - 2. Two Bedroom 3. Three Bedroom I ! 50 I 4. Residential Lobby I 51 5. Elevator Core 6. Retail 2 7. Surface Parking I � 49 52 8. Loading/Receiving 3 28 9 53 9. Speed Ramp 48 .. 10. Club Room I 4 54 11. Fitness 47 . 12. Roof Deck 5 15 r�r 13. Roof Top MEP 46 14, Flat Roof I 6 15. Parking 5 45 „-56 I& Setback Terrace - — 44 57 17. Storage (Tenant( 7 27 29 , 18. Mechanical — 43 58 8 26 30 59 42 I 9 25 31 60 10 15 24 32 41 61 r 40 i 11 23 33 V 12 2222 344 - - -— 13 21 35 r 14 20 36 15 19 37 I I 16 18 38 �1 1 17 39 1 Typical Residential Floor Plan PROGRAM KEY: / 1. One Bedroom / =D2 2. Two Bedroom3. Three Bedroom 4. Residential Lobby5. Elevator Core 26. Retail 7. Surface Parking 8. Loading/Receiving 9. Speed Ramp5 10. Club Room11. Fitness 12. Roof Deck 213. RoofTop MEP 14. Flat Roof - - 15. Parking 16. Setback Terrace 17. Storage (Tenant) 18. Mechanical [243 I One Bedroom Two Bedroom 780 NSF 986 NSF v V LI L = r El Split Two Bedroom Three Bedroom 986 NSF 1248-1370 NSF 47'-a^ 1 LI I o G N N S - 4 _ _ iT- Washington Street Elevation PRECAST BAND r STOREFRONT PROJECTING BAY AWNING Ir MEr.CLADDING BRICK I GLAZING F WOWG. PRECAST BASE VENEER TYP. I I I r MET.CLADDING \ ---fie 1� MIML fV -05 ® ® ® ® ® o ® ® ® � — —o—* 0 9 Salem District Courthouse Redevelopment Salem, Massachusetts Aerial View Looking North East �e-Y Aerial View Looking North West g F Irk � �� '�� i!�- •-"=-'�I� /- 'y- F ' �`J_ � � cbt Salem District Courthouse ; Redevelopment