7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
1/55
weberthompsongraphicpresentat
ion
1321 SenecaeaRly deSiGn GUidance i i | dpd #3012930 | JUly 18tH , 2012
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
2/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
107.18.12
Site
Site Information ....................................................................................................................................
Site Survey ............................................................................................................................................
Site Analysis ..........................................................................................................................................
Land Use Code Highlights......................................................................................................................
Neighborhood Context .......................................................................................................................
Neighborhood Height ..........................................................................................................................
Appoximate Neighborhood Timeline ............................................. ............................ .........................
Neighborhood Timeline .......................................................................................................................
maSSinG optionS fRom 1St edG
Original Massing Options .....................................................................................................................
Massing Option 1 ........................ ............................ ............................ ............................ .....................
Massing Option 2 .................................................................................................................................
Massing Option 3 .................................................................................................................................
deSiGn GUidelineS
Design Guidelines .................................................................................................................................
new pRefeRRed ScHeme
Preferred Scheme Parti Diagram .........................................................................................................
Preferred Scheme Plans ............................ ............................. ............................ ............................ ......
Preferred Scheme Section ...................................................................................................................
Preferred Scheme Renderings .............................................................................................................
Design Inspiration.................................................................................................................................
Materials ...............................................................................................................................................
Streetscape & L1 Terrace .....................................................................................................................
Landscape................................................................................................................................................
Proposed Departure Diagram .............................................................................................................
appendiX
Full Zoning Synopsis .............................................................................................................................
Below-Grade Parking Plan ......................... ............................ ............................ ............................. .....
Shadow Studies ....................................................................................................................................
Aerial Perspectives ........................... ............................ ............................ ............................. ...............
Site Photos ...........................................................................................................................................
1321 Seneca | c ont ent s
Project Visionth 1321 S rj s h rs h vbr ghbrhs frs H h pk p trg.
wh s rx h s jr uss S Uvrs, h rj s x r vrsgup f id. th pjc i big dlpd a al apam ad will ff a mix f ui iz ad cguai
h h vr s rs s. a s s h h rj b sg bh
v h sr v k vg sur vs r h s. B rvg sg, hgh-rs r
pi a h i, w a llig wha w pci b a hl i h ighbhd al ma.
Bs ur ru su h xsg bug sk h ghbrh, hr r xs r
rhur ss vr rs. Gr, h bugs x h rv ss h
hr sru. w rs u h s bsh r h bug b ,
r s. as h g gs, ug s grs, ru g gu
h sg s s urhr v. Gru v s g h h rqu r sbks s sg h h
sr xr g h s rr h rs hs r h frs H nghbrh.
th rrr rs hs s edG g, hs b rvs svr ss rss bk
baid a w cmmuiy mig ha w hld fllwig h eDG mig. th maig f h buildig ha b
id a m claic w fm wih a dd ba pdium ha la h cal f ighbig buildig, ad a
implid w haf ha ha a mall f pi ha h h w pi pd. th ppd paig cu hab rs h rs u u hs b rs. th gr v sg sh hs b rvs h
us bh sv rr h sr r vg ub s ssus.
SITE
SITE
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
3/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
207.18.12
Project Objectivesad dr eS S 1321 S Sr
reS idenTial uSeSarx. 215 rs r s; x
su, 1 2 br us
uSe d iSTriBuTion By Floor
bs: Paig 5 Appx. 0.8 paig all/Ui
l 1ridial Lbby ad Li/W
l 2-23 Rs lvsl 24 (Rf): R dk & Gr
h eigh T 240' Hgh (+30' r mh a)
ToTal BuildaBle area arx. 194,000 gs
1321 Seneca | s it e inFor m at ion
CalulaTionS
gS F nRS F
Gf 8,983 1,563
l2 8,222 6,734
l3 9,748 8,338
l4 9,454 8,060
l5 7,212 5,456
l6-21 133,184 110,016
l22-23 16,643 13,950
total 193,437 154,117
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
4/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
307.18.12
1321 Seneca | s it e s ur vey
th s rss s 1321 S Sr. th s s rh Srg Sr, s Bs avu, s Su avu
suh S Sr. th s us h rhs r h bk h rs Bs avu
S Sr. a srvs h s S. th s s sur gr rkg
Bs avu. aj h s, h s, rss h , hr s sr r bug. Suh h
i, h i a ix y apam b uilidg wih ail h gud . th i lp dwwad appximaly ix f
r h suhs rr h rhs rr. th s hs 120' rg bh g S Sr Bs
avu.
Site Details
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
5/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
407.18.12
1321 Seneca | s it e anaLys is
opportunities
Acc Pi/Pi Cid.
n hghrs r s urr
wh x frs H p , vs r
u.
Limid vhicula afc/gd pdia
Qfc Grr Sr.
prx frs H Sr cr Br
sru)
Gr rx hss
Key
S
Aial/Fway
prk
Hs
Bus S
eu
Senec
aSt
.
boRen
ave.
bRoaDw
ay
constraints
small l iz limi pla ad paig fcicy.
Sh r b.
aj rs r h s
urs.
frs H p tr s rugh 100' r.
nghbr h suh hs s g h s.
ma
DiSo
nav
e.
union St.
Pine St.
i -5
i -5
union St.
Pine St.
boRenave.
Constraints & Opportunities
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
6/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
607.18.12
1321 Seneca | Land us e c od e highL ight s
HR (hgh rs)
HR zoninG GeneRal commentS:
Hgh, faR (fr ar R) h rh hr r gvrrs h HR . fr
pla iz, bac, ad w widh al iuc
hgs, hvr h b rb hrugh h
sg rv rss.
HR flooR aRea R atio (faR)SMC 23.45.510
Bs faR s 8.0 s 15,000 s (squr ) r
ss s.
mxu faR r sruurs 240' r ss hgh s
13.0 xu.
mxu faR r sruurs vr 240' s 14.0
xu.
HR StRU ctU Re He iGHtSMC 23.45.514
Bs hgh l s 160'.
Maximum High Limi i 240' 300' if xa
idial aa i gaid hugh ici
g chr 23.58a S 23.45.516.
rfp lm h a umu
hgh s r r s,
urs, r urs S 23.45.514.
"phus vs" r us rss
r h r v.
Zoning & Overlays
HR SetBacK and SepaR ationSSMC 23.45.518
a s bu g h sr:
prs sruur 45' r b: 7' vrg
sbk, 5' .
prs bv 45': 10' u sbk.
a s bu g :
prs sruur 45' r b: sbk s
rqur.
prs bv 45': 10' u sbk.
a s h bu hr s r r :
prs sruur 45' r b: 7' vrg
sbk, 5' ., x h sbk s rqur
r rs bug xsg sruur bu h
bug .
prs bv 45': 20' u sbk.
Sbks r rb s .
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
7/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
707.18.12
1321 Seneca | Land us e c od e highL ight s
HR toweR widtH and flooRlimitS SMC 23.45.520
i HR s rs sruurs bv h r xu h 110.
h sruur s ur g h gs s r
b rs s s, rv h
r h s gh, h rs
h s r g sr
. a xu h 130 s
pidd ha h aag g a
srs bv 45 hgh s
10,000 Sf; r
b. If h applica u bu idial
b rvg h rb hus
h rj (r 23.58a.014), h x
h h sruur bv 45
150, pidd ha h aag g srs bv 45 hgh s
12,000 Sf.
HR ReS idential amenity aReSMC 23.45.522
Rs rs, ug bu
ks, bs , rrs, r grs,
urrs, rs r sr urs, r r
a amu qual 5% f h al g
sruur rs us. n r h 5
rs r b s
thr r rqurs h
Zoning & Overlays
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
8/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
807.18.12
1321 Seneca | neighbor hood c ont ext
1
Ther a peuTiC he a lTh ServiCeS hillTop CourT SuMMiT annex Fir ST hill pl az a T welve TwenT
Spring
The TuSC any aparTMenT Building STiMSon green ManSion a pa rTMenT Building ST. paul apar
CharBonneau The ManhaTTan MaxiMill ian SeaTTle F irST BapT iST
2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
9/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
907.18.12
1321 Seneca | neighbor hood c ont ext
9
1110
12
16
15
14
13
6
7
8
2
1
3
4
5
SENE
CASTREET
BOYLST
ONAVEN
UE
HARVA
RDAVEN
UE
SUMMITAVEN
UEM
INORAVEN
UE
SPRIN
GSTREET
UNIVE
RSITY
STREET
MADIS
ONSTREET
17
polyCliniC
polyCliniC
dearBo
14 15
16 17
Context Analysis
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
10/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
1007.18.12
Senec
aStRe
et
BoylStonaVenUe
60'
25'
55'
50'
1321 Seneca | neighbor hood he ight
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
11/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
1207.18.12
1321 Seneca | a pp ox im at e ne ig hb or ho od ti me Li n e
1930s1920s 1950s1940s 1960s
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
12/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
1307.18.12
1321 Seneca | neighbor hood t im eL ine
1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s 2010s
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
13/55
Massing Options from 1st EDG
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
14/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
1607.18.12
1321 Seneca | or ig inaL m as s ing opt ions
oRiGinal maSS inG optionS
1option 2option 3option
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
15/55
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
16/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
1807.18.12
2maSSinG option
1321 Seneca | m as s ing opt ion 2
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
17/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
1907.18.12
1321 Seneca | m as s ing opt ion 3
3maSSinG option
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
18/55
Design Guidelines
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
19/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
2207.18.12
1321 Seneca | d es ign guid eL ines
titLe description communit y Feedback response
a-1 Responding to Site
Characteristics
The siting of buildings should respond to
specic site conditions and opportunities such
as non-rectangular lots, location on prominent
intersections, unusual topography, signicant
vegetation and views or other natural features.
While the site is small and setbacks as well as site size largely dictate bu
location, the site is at the SW corner of the intersection of Boylston and
massing and organization of the buildings primary architectural elemen
the relationship of the project to the streets and neighbors.
a-2 Streetscape Compatibility The siting of buildings should acknowledge
and reinforce the existing desirable spatial
characteristics of the right-of-way.
The Board characterized the proposed setback widths at the ground plane along
Seneca St. and Boylston Ave. as overly generous (even heroic). This is particularly
true for Option #3. The diagrams presented at the meeting do not reveal enough
information about the character of the neighborhood for the Board to know
whether these wide setbacks are appropriate and how their design responds to
security concerns of the neighbors.
The different characteristics of Seneca and Boylston should inform the design
at the ground plane. Boylston appears to be more pedestrian oriented. Further
analysis of the neighborhood character is necessary. In addition, the programming
of uses within the rst level should also inuence the design of the streetscapes.
At EDG 1, in the preferred option the applicant had attempted to provi
the amount of open space than required by code at the street frontages
rather than 7 average minimum) with the belief that it would be a publi
The zoning code calls for seven foot minimum setbacks at street frontag
0-45 in height, so having the traditional zero-lot line, urban relationship
sidewalk is therefore not supported or intended by DPD, so the applica
providing even more setbacks and greenery would be a plus. However did not support increasing the setback, favoring the lesser setbacks from
1 and 2. The applicant has acquiesced and adjusted the new design and
approximately seven feet of building setbacks from the back of sidewalk
Seneca and Boylston up to a height of approximately 45 feet.
Of the streetscapes, Boylston is thought to be the most pedestrian in na
Per public and board comment, the applicant is now proposing to have
residential entry facing Bolyston, near the corner. The majority of the r
frontage of Boylston at grade is space for two live/work units. Those co
positively to the environment of Boylston.
a-3 Entrances Visible
from the Street
Entries should be clearly identiable and visible
from the street.
Per A-2 response above, the entry has been moved to the corner, facin
a-4 Human Activity New development should be sited and designed
to encourage human activity on the street.
a-5 Respect for Adjacent Sites Buildings should respect adjacent properties bybeing located on their sites to minimize disruption
of the privacy and outdoor activities of residents
in adjacent buildings.
The Board noted its reluctance to consider recommending departure request #3,reducing the ground plane setback at the south property line to two feet, given a
representative of the Hilltop Courts opposition. The added de pth of the setback
at the upper portions of the podium seemed reasonable.
The applicant has met with a representative from Hilltop Court, pursuibenecial setbacks / separations. The new design reects those discuss
a-1 a-3 a-5
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
20/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
2307.18.12
1321 Seneca | d es ign guid eL ines
titLe description communit y Feedback response
a-6 Transition between
Residence and Street
For residential projects, the space between t he
building and the sidewalk should provide security
and privacy for residents and encourage social
interaction among residents and neighbors.
See guidance for A-2. The Board registered its consternation toward the overly
generous setbacks along Seneca and Boylston and asked for further analysis.
Per A-2 above, the applicant has adjusted the new design per board com
providing approximately seven feet of building setbacks for the podium.
is similar to the podium design of Options 1 and 2 at EDG 1.
a-7 Residential Open Space Residential projects should be sited to maximize
opportunities for creating usable, attractive, well-
integrated open space.
The 15 foot setbacks along the streetscape (Option # 3) would create
problematic open spaces. As mentioned in other guidance, the Board requests
more analysis of how the proposal adopts established urban patterns on First Hill.
Per A-2 and A-6 above, the applicant has adjusted the new design per b
comments, providing approximately seven feet of building setbacks for t
a-8 Parking and Vehicle Access Siting should minimize the impact of automobile
parking and driveways on the pedestrian
environment, adjacent properties and pedestrian
safety.
The parking and vehicular accesses are in the alley and as far away from
possible, per DPD standards.
a-9 Location of Parking on
Commercial Storefronts
a-10 Corner Lots Building on corner lots should be oriented to
the corner and public street fronts. Parking and
automobile access should be located away from
corners.
The new preferred design fronts the corner of the site and
the intersection at it fronts.
b-1 Height, Bulk, and Scale
Compatibility
Projects should be compatible with the scale
of development anticipated by the applicable
Land Use Policies for the surrounding area
and should be sited and designed to provide
a sensitive transition to near-by, less intensive
zones. Projects on zone edges should be
developed in a manner that creates a step
in perceived height, bulk, and scale between
anticipated development potential of the
adjacent zones.
The Board conveyed its reticence to encourage a bold or ambitious design such
as Option #3 without additional information describing the applicants attitude
toward the structures relationship to its context. The issue of setbacks along
Seneca and Boylston has been discussed in other sections. If the applicant
pursues Option #3, the architects will need to provide 1) more analysis of
the urban patterns, buildings and landscapes within the neighborhood and 2)
character studies of the tower and how the stacked or engaged boxes, the
leitmotif of the proposal, addresses issues of neighborhood scale, materials and
prevailing architectural elements (fenestration patterns, pier and spandrel, and
building form). The massing and the street level setbacks for Options #2 and 3
resemble more traditional building forms (albeit the grids inadvertently suggest
ofce rather than residential structures). The Board expressed its comfort
with the applicant proceeding to the Master Use Permit (MUP) stage should
the applicant choose to develop one of these massing approaches. Concerns
regarding these options relationship to their context, scale etc., as described for
Option #3, would still be germane.
The applicant has embraced the board guidance and is no longer propo
favoring an iconic tower. Per direction, the applicant is proposing a ne
design, drawing from aspects of Options 1 and 2 from the rst EDG. Th
setbacks are now at their code -minimum as directed and the podium is
plan view than the tower, resulting in a much more traditional massing r
between base and tower. The massing of the tower is simple and respe
by many in the public as well as the board for the project to be less busy
timeless, while being a modern building of its time.
a-7 a-8 a-10
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
21/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
2407.18.12
1321 Seneca | d es ign guid eL ines
titLe description communit y Feedback response
c-1 Architectural Context New buildings proposed for existing
neighborhoods with a well-dened and desirable
character should be compatible with or
complement the architectural character and siting
pattern of neighboring buildings.
P. 14 of the supplementary information and pp. 14-15 of the booklet begin to
suggest underlying urban patterns and building forms within the neighborhood
in spite of the salmagundi of architectural styles. As design development of any
of the three options proceeds, the architect must produce a convincing visual
argument that the choices made represent a thorough understanding of this
portion of the First Hill context.
While towers are few and far between in the immediate context, the cl
of First Hill Plaza provides [an even taller] contextual example of simplic
applicant is proposing a clean tower with an emphasis on verticality. Th
podium is partially expressed and visually supported by a framework th
in materials of permanence. These frames are 45 from average grade
lines, relating and bringing the scale down to that of many of the project
c-2 Architectural Concept and
Consistency
Building design elements, details and massing
should create a well-proportioned and unied
building form and exhibit an overall architectural
concept. Buildings should exhibit form and
features identifying the functions within the
building. In general, the rooine or top of thestructure should be clearly distinguished from
its facade walls.
Although it goes without saying that any elaboration of one of the three options
requires architectural consistency from small detail to building form, the third
scenario, in particular, has a higher hurdle due to its unusual form.
The projects parti involves three primary elements; a podium and two
tower treatments, one partially wrapping the other. The other taller an
form grounds itself while fronting the corner and the entry.
c-3 Human Scale The design of new buildings should incorporate
architectural features, elements, and details
to achieve a good human scale
Depending upon the execution of the stacked boxes (Option #3) concept, the
designs scale should not overwhelm the intimate residential character that much
of the neighborhood exudes. The architects investigation should recognize
that the building will be experienced from a variety of distances. The proposed
structure should speak to those distances just as the First Baptist Church is
experienced differently from both a variety of directions and distances.
Much has changed with the new preferred design and many of the com
directional statements pertaining to the previously preferred option no
c-4 Exterior Finish Materials Building exteriors should be constructed
of durable and maintainable materials that
are attractive even when viewed up close.
Materials that have texture, pattern, or lend
themselves to a high quality of detailing
are encouraged.
Should the architect choose to create a mostly transparent or porous base, then
the programming of the uses along the two perimeter streets should engage
the streetscape. Alternatively, a design emphasizing the street wall lined with
residential uses and composed of predominantly opaque materials is also a
suitable strategy. At the next Board meeting, the choice should be evident. Do
the stacked boxes have different materials depending upon their height? Do the
base and possibly the lower boxes want to be a different material than the upperboxes? These considerations should be studied by the architect and brought
forward at the next meeting. The applicant will need to produce character
sketches that illustrate the choice of materials or the range of materials being
considered. The Board emphasized the desire for a richness of materials and
noted that stone and brick were commonly found on First Hill.
c-1&2 c-3 c-4
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
22/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
2507.18.12
titLe description communit y Feedback response
D-1 Pedestrian Open Spaces
and Entrances
Convenient and attractive access to the buildings entry should be provided. To ensure comfort
and security, paths and entry areas should be sufciently lighted and entry areas should be
protected from the weather. Opportunities for creating lively, pedestrian-oriented open space
should be considered.
Use principles of crime prevention through environmental
design (CPTED) to inuence the decision making for the
landscape and streetscape designs.
Agreed, CPTED practices are necessary at t
D-2 Blank Walls Buildings should avoid large blank walls facing the street, especially near sidewalks. Where blank
walls are unavoidable they should receive design treatment to increase pedestrian comfort and
interest
D-6 Screening of Dumpsters,
Utilities, and Service Areas
Building sites should locate service elements like trash dumpsters, loading docks and mechanical
equipment away from the street front where possible. When elements such as dumpsters, utility
meters, mechanical units and service areas c annot be located away from the street front, they
should be situated and screened from view and should not be located in the pedestrian right-of-
way.
The Board requested more descriptive information showing
how the services areas function. Where is the waste storage
area? How will it be delivered to the recycling and garbage
trucks? Will there be an exterior storage area on the alley?
All service areas as well as the dock and par
and egress will be secured and within the bu
Service areas show on the ground oor plan
Trash and recycling are to be located near th
chute in specied spaces. Typically trash andare moved out to garbage trucks in dumpste
wheels. There are no outdoor storage area
being designed with this project.
D-7 Personal Safety and Security Project design should consider opportunities
for enhancing personal safety and security in
the environment under review.
See guidance for D-1.
D-8 Treatment of Alleys The design of alley entrances should enhance
the pedestrian street front.
A considerable portion of the alley has exposure to Seneca St.
Materials should wrap around the corner from Seneca into
the alley.
The podium frame wraps around the corner
with it a large bay of the frame treatment in
D-9 Commercial Signage Signs should add interest to the street front environment and should be appropriate for the scale
and character desired in the area.
As design development occurs, the quality and placement
of signage for the live/work or commercial spaces will be
reviewed by the Board.
Agreed. Signage information will be propose
at Recommendation.
D-10 Commercial Lighting Appropriate levels of lighting should be provided in order to promote visual interest and a sense
of security for people in commercial districts during evening hours. Lighting may be providedby incorporation into the building faade, the underside of overhead weather protection,
on and around street furniture, in merchandising display windows, in landscaped areas,
and/or on signage.
The Board expects the submittal of a lighting plan for the
exterior commercial spaces prior to the Recommendationmeeting.
The applicant respectfully proposes to provi
lighting plan for the exterior at Recommendanote, there are no exterior commercial spa
proposed on the project.
D-6, 8D-2
1321 Seneca | d es ign guid eL ines
titLe description communit y Feedback response
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
23/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
2607.18.12
titLe description communit y Feedback response
D-11 Commercial Transparency Commercial storefronts should be transparent, allowing for a direct v isual connection between
pedestrians on the sidewalk and the activities occurring on the interior of a building. Blank
walls should be avoided.
As design progresses, the character of the storefronts or
live/work units facing Boylston Ave will need to meet the
aspirations for a pedestrian oriented streetscape.
Agreed, this will be studied and appropriate
also satises the energy code will be propos
D-12 Residential Entries and
Transitions
For residential projects in commercial zones, the space between the residential entry and the
sidewalk should provide security and privacy for residents and a visually interesting street front
for pedestrians. Residential buildings should enhance the character of the streetscape with small
gardens, stoops and other elements that work to create a transition between the public sidewalk
and private entry.
e-1 Landscaping to Reinforce
Design Continuity with
Adjacent Sites
Where possible, and where there is not another overriding concern, landscaping should reinforce
the character of neighboring properties and abutting streetscape.
Other than offering vicinity photos and some text, the
applicant has not fully investigated the context in which
landscaping choices should be considered. How do the
insights from this analysis inform the design? Is the proposal atower in a garden or does it evoke a more traditional urban
pattern in which the building sits close to the adjacent streets?
The landscape concept drawings indicate the
desire to provide substantial amounts of gree
other visual amenities in the public realm. Th
units will have small gardens and level stoopsaccommodations. These spaces will be gated
reecting the public comments from the rst
to generous right of way dimensions and the
setbacks, this actually creates the opportunit
a series of landscaping zones, adding to the n
transition from streets to sidewalks to entrie
e-2 Landscaping to Enhance the
Building and/or Site
Landscaping, including living plant material, special pavements, trellises, screen walls, planters,
site furniture, and similar features should be appropriately incorporated into the design to
enhance the project.
The concerns noted by the public and the Board as re ected
in the guidance provided in A-2, A- 6, A-7 and E-1 should
inuence the decision making as the landscape design
develops.
Agreed.
1321 Seneca | d es ign guid eL ines
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
24/55
New Preferred Option
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
25/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
2807.18.12
1321 Seneca | pr eFer r ed s c hem e par t i d iagr am
mecHanical
Rooftop amenity
ReSidential
fitneSS amenity
mecHanical
loBBy
mecHanical
LIve/Work UnIts
parti ma ssing progr am
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
26/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
2907.18.12
1321 Seneca | pr eFer r ed s c hem e
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
27/55
boylSton
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
28/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
3107.18.12
1321 Seneca | pr eFer r ed s c hem e gr ound LeveL pLan
paRKinG
CoMMerCIAL/retAIL
ReSidential
amenity
VeRt. tRanSpoRtation
BacK of HoUSe
ground FLoor pLa
0 16' 32'
1/16"=1'-0"
8'
Seneca
al le y
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
29/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
3207.18.12
1321 Seneca | pr eFer r ed s c hem e pLans
paRKinG
CoMMerCIAL/retAIL
ReSidential
amenity
VeRt. tRanSpoRtation
BacK of HoUSe
LeveL 2 pLan
LeveL 4 pLan
LeveL 3 pLan
LeveL 5 pLan
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
30/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
3307.18.12
1321 Seneca | pr eFer r ed s c hem e pLans
LeveL 6-21 pLan
LeveL 22-23 pLanrooF pLan
0 16' 32'
1/16"=1'-0"
8'
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
31/55
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
32/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
3507.18.12
1321 Seneca | pr eFer r ed s c hem e
View fRom noRtHweSt
View fRom SoUtHe aStView fRom noRtHea St
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
33/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
3607.18.12
1321 Seneca | pr eFer r ed s c hem e ent r anc e
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
34/55
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
35/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
3807.18.12
1321 Seneca | pr eFer r ed s c hem e s enec a s t r eet ed ge
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
36/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
3907.18.12
1321 Seneca | pr eFer r ed s c hem e aLLey
View fRom Seneca to alle y View aBoVe alley
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
37/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
4007.18.12
1321 Seneca | pr eFer r ed s c hem e L2 t er r ac e
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
38/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
4107.18.12
1321 Seneca | pr eFer r ed s c hem e r ooF t er r ac e
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
39/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
4207.18.12
1321 Seneca | d es ign ins p ir at ion
ViSion Gla SS
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
40/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
4307.18.12
liGHt GRa
wHite Spa
mUllion
mUllion
waRm GRa
cHaRcoal metal
BlacK metal
mediUm GRay metal
teRRa cotta 1
teRRa cotta 2
1321 Seneca | m at er iaLs
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
41/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
4407.18.12
1321 Seneca | s t r eet s c ape & L1 t er r ac e
LOW CURB WALL
W/FENCE &GATE
(TYP)
StReetScape 0 16'
1/16"=1'-0"
8'
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
42/55
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
43/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
4607.18.12
1321 Seneca | pr opos ed d epar t ur e d iagr am
Proposed Departure
item # 1
deVelopmentStandaRdS
SMC 23.45.518hr SeTBaCKS
pReScRiptiVe at t s btt
stt
f stct 4
b: 7'
5' m.
pRopoSed at t t b
b t t
pts f st
b: 2' st
ground floor an
set back on floo
conSideRationS as f ms s
bt m
b b
st.
7'pReScRiptiVeSetBacK
7'pReScRiptiVeSetBacK
pRopeRtyline
13' additionalVolUntaRy SetBacK
mainBUildinGfacade
podiUmfootpRint aBoVe15' and Below 45'
toweRfootpRintaBoVe 45'
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
44/55
Appendix
Zoning Synopsis
HR Zoning geneRal commentS HR SetbackSaDD it io na l He ig Ht anD eX tR a b If h applica u bu idial
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
45/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
4807.18.12
1321 Seneca | FuLL Zoning s ynops is
HR Zoning geneRal commentS
Hgh, faR (fr ar R) h r
h hr r gvrrs h HR . fr
pla iz, bac, ad w widh al iuc
hgs, hvr h b rb hrugh h
sg rv rss.
HR FlooR aRea R atio (FaR)Smc 23.45.510
Bs faR s 8.0 s 15,000 s (squr ) r ss
s. mxu faR r sruurs 240' r ss hgh
s 13.0 xu.
mxu faR r sruurs vr 240' s 14.0
xu.
HR FaR eXemPtionSSmc 23.45.510
Gud cmmcial u wih 13
hgh . 15 u.
es rs s.
a h qu 3. 5% h
g aa, xcludig xmpd pac lid
bv.
a srs r r s sr h x r
h 4 bv gr.
HR StRuctuRe HeigHtSmc 23.45.514
Bs hgh l s 160'.
Maximum High Limi i 240' 300' if xa
idial aa i gaid hugh ici
g chr 23.58a S 23.45.516.
rfp lm h a umu
hgh s r r s,
urs, r urs S 23.45.514.
"phus vs" r us rss r
h r v.
HR SetbackSSmc 23.45.518 (taBle B)
and varied setbacks in the hr code
a s bu g h sr:
prs sruur 45' r b: 7' vrg
sbk, 5' .
prs bv 45': 10' u sbk.
a s bu g :
prs sruur 45' r b: sbks
rqur.
prs bv 45': 10' u sbk.
a s h bu hr s r r
prs sruur 45' r b: 7' vrg
sbk, 5' ., x h sbk s rqur
r rs bug xsg sruur bu h
bug .
prs bv 45': 20' u sbk
Sbks r rb s .
HR SePaRationS betweenmultiPle StRuctuReSSmc 23.45.518 (taBle c)HR facade separation for structures on the same lot.
Hgh rg 0-45: n sr rqur b
s
Hgh rg bv 45-160: 30 sr rqurb
Hgh rg bv 160: 40 sr rqur
b s
HR wiDtH anD FlooR SiZe l imitSSmc 23.45.520i HR s rs sruurs bv hgh 45
r xu h 110. th h
h sruur sur g h gs sr
b rs s s, rv h bh sr
r h s gh, h rs h h
h s r g sr:
. a xu h 130 s r,
pidd ha h aag g aa f all
srs bv 45 hgh s x10,000 Sf; r
aDD it io na l He ig Ht anD eX tR aReSiDential FlooR aRea:Smc 23.45.514
1. exa idial aa. I Hr z xa
idial aa may b gaid i accdac wih
chr 23.58a subj h s s hs
ci 23.45.516. Up all xa idial aa
b g hrugh h rb husg v
rgr rvss S 23.58a.014. U 40%
xa idial aa may b gaid by ay
b :
. trsr v ;
b. prvg ghbrh s r
liu hf; ad/
. prvg ghbrh gr sr sbk
2. Sruur hgh.
. Sruur 240 r ss hgh. th b
hgh HR ur subs
23.45.514.A i 240 if h applica ai h
cdii f xa aa bu all f h
s subs c.2.B ( b)
hs s r .
b. Sruurs vr 240. th b hgh
HR ur sub-s 23.45.514.a s 300
h applica ai h cdii f xa
r h g s r :
. fr sruur bv hgh 85, haag idial g aa p
sr bv hgh 45 s x
9,500 Sf,
. n rkg s r bv gr,
uss s sr r h sr
s b hr us;
. a s 25% h r gr s
r r s rs, h h
u hr s 10 ,
r s 20% h r gr s
s, rs
r g h srs 23.45.522.
b. If h applica u bu idial
b rvg h rb hus
h rj (r 23.58a.014), h x
h h sruur bv 45
150, pidd ha h aag g
srs bv 45 hgh s
12,000 Sf.
ipr n: th HR s h
hr rs hgh
( a maximum f 300) if h pla d
9,500 sF hy ca ica h pla12,000 rs h h 150
bh. ths s r b
s h HR .
th a addiial im i h cd pai
s. t x h , v
d ica h pla iz ab
maximum. Im b ab i aumd f h
B h, h sg rv rss
pibly dpa fm cai cd im, i
s h.
HR ReSiDential amenity aSmc 23.45.522
Rs rs, ug bu
ks, bs , rrs, r grs, urrs, rs r sr urs, r r
a amu qual 5% f h al g
sruur rs us. n r h 5
rs r b s
thr r rqurs h
HR PaRkingSmc 23.54.015
. thr r u rkg rqur
rs uss r r u-
s h urb rs r h h
ovr dsr.
b. lv rk: 0 ss r us h 1,500
s r h u grr h 1,500 s
. Ss srv s: s r
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
46/55
HR PRojectionS into RequiReD
Additional HR Land Use Code Excerpts cont'd 300 w high maximum wih 9,500 sF maximum
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
47/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
5007.18.12
j qSetbackS anD SePaRationS:Smc 23.45.518
1. crs, vs, gurs, rs hr rs
hr r rj rqur
sbks srs xu 2 h
r sr h 3 .
2. Gr s hr urs h
pid aa may pjc 18 ich i quid
sbks srs. ohr s
h .
3. B s hv srs s h .
4. Us ks bs rj
xu 4 rqur sbks
srs h r:
. n sr h 5 r:
b. n r h 20 r sr
r hr bs b s qu
s h h h h rj.
. ohr s h .
Urgru sruurs r r rqur
sbk r sr. e s sruurs r b
gad, a xiig ihd gad, which i lw,
r r rqur sbk r sr.
HR lanDScaPing RequiRementS:Smc 23.45.524
Gr fr rqur. lsg h hvs
Gr fr sr 0.5 r grr s rqur r
v.
thr r , hr rqurs r sg
h .
as r v gg x r
idial aa hall ma a cmmim ha hsruur gr bug srs b rg
leed Svr rg r Bu-Gr 4-sr rg
h msr Bu rs ass Kg Shsh
cus, evrgr Susb dv Sr
vrs 1.2.
HR leeD, built gReen, anDeveRgReen SuStainableDeveloPment StanDaRDS:Smc 23.45.526
as r v g g xr
idial aa hall ma a cmmim ha h
sruur gr bug srs b rg
leed Svr rg r Bu-Gr 4-sr rg
h msr Bu rs ass Kg Shsh
cus, evrgr Susb dv Sr
vrs 1.2 a sruur x h b h gh
h HR s s:
Caa Which Apply Bh opi:
Calculai a appxima ima f wha ca
b xpcd. th pcic buildig pgam, dig
ad h fac ca iuc yild, fcicy, c.
similaly, acual paig aa will b h ul f
rs b r suh s u r u
did, dig fcicy, c.
g
pla ad a FAr maximum f 14 i f
urs r h 240 r hgh xu
wih 12,000 sF maximum pla ad a FAr
xu 13. Bh shu b , su
ad cmpad i dph wh h al i ad h
rv rj rrs r r.
Fl pla i hi udy a impl bx, ab
shg, u, .
tpgaphy ifmai f hi udy wa ucd
r Kg cu GiS, hh s gr s bg ur; hvr s r h
grh surv r h s(s) b ss .
DPD Zoning DocumentS online:
Rv c S g us r
hs rsss:
hp://cl.ci.al.wa.u/~public/c/23-45.hm
hp://cl.ci.al.wa.u/~cip/ph-b.x?1=&3=&
4=123495&2=&5=&sc4=AnD&l=20&sc2=tHeson
&sc3=PLUron&sc5=CBorY&sc6=HItoFF&d=o
rDF&p=1&u=%2F%7epublic%2Fcby.hm&=1&f=G
hp://cl.al.g/~cip/ph-b.x?1=&3=117117&4=&2=&5=&sc4=AnD&l=20&sc2=tHeson&sc
3=PLUron&sc5=CBorY&sc6=HItoFF&d=orDF&
p=1&u=%2F%7epublic%2Fcby.hm&=1&f=G
1321 Seneca | FuLL Zoning s ynops is
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
48/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
5107.18.12
1321 Seneca | beLow - gr ad e par k ing pLan
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
49/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
5207.18.12
1321 Seneca | s had ow s t ud ies
3:30 pm 12:00 pm 8:30 am
7:00 pm 12:00 pm 7:00 am
winteRSolStice
SUmmeRSolStice
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
50/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
5307.18.12
View to noRtH
1321 Seneca | ae ri a L pe r sp ec ti ve s
View to eaSt
View to SoUtH View to weSt
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
51/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
5407.18.12
Boylston
Aven
ue
SenecaStre
et
Sp
ring
Stre
e
t
1321 Seneca | s it e phot os
3
2
1. View of Site fRom coRneR of Seneca and BoylSton
2. View of Site fRom coRneR of Seneca and SUmmit
3. View of Site fRom coRneR of BoySton and SpRinG
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
52/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
5507.18.12
BoylSTon avenue
SeneCa STreeT
1321 Seneca | s it e phot os
Site Photosths s s qu ghbrh rg
sr ss shg, s,
hghr u sus ub r
Pdsr ass d as: ex
lrg Surrk (Qfc): bks
Rsurs Shg: bks
rcai: Cal Ad Pa ad Pla
mr ep crs:
S Uvrs us: hr bk
Ssh m cr: hr bks
Vrg ms Hs: hr bks
Hrbrv Hs: bks
p: bk
sal Dww ofc C: igh
Hhr ed:S Uvrs us: hr bk
S cr cu cg
P trspr: ex
frqu mr Bus Rus: bk
lgh R: c H S (ur
frs H Srr: (ur sru
c H gh r s gg r
h ir dsr p r
suhs.
Br mr Sr cr S
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
53/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
5607.18.12
1321 Seneca | s it e phot os
View fRom Site acRoS S Seneca StRee t
View fRom Site acRoS S BoylSton aVenUe
Photos from Site
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
54/55
www.weberthompson.com
COPYRIGHT 2012 WEBER THOMPSON | 11-057
5707.18.12
1321 Seneca | s it e phot os
View to Site acRoS S Seneca StRee t
View to Site acRoS S BoylSton aVenUe
Senec
aStRee
t
BoylStonaVenUe
Photos to Site
Site
Site
7/31/2019 Dr Proposal 3012930 Agenda Id 3668
55/55