Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (20)
Similar to B5 A Miraculous Transformation
Similar to B5 A Miraculous Transformation (20)
More from Southern New England American Planning Association
More from Southern New England American Planning Association (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
B5 A Miraculous Transformation
- 2. Ames Shovel Works Industrial Strength - A Miraculous Transformation at Ames Shovel Works
- 3. Presenters • Josh Cohen – Beacon Communities LLC • Stephanie Danielson – Town of Easton • David LaPointe – Beals + Thomas • Jason Cohen – Prellwitz Chilinski Associates • Monique Hall – Halvorson Design Partnership
- 4. Ames Shovel Works • The Consensus Approach • Fulfilling a Community Need • Give & Take – Making it Work • Contextual Site Approaches
- 5. History • 1852 – Long Shop built • 1870 – Shovel production peaks • 1928-1929 – last major building built • 1953 – Ames company leaves Easton • 2008-2009 – Nat’l Trust for Historic Preservation 11 Most Endangered Sites status declared
- 7. What was the problem? • Previous development proposal: • Destruction of important historical site • Too many units • Too tall, with inappropriate architecture • Inexperienced developer
- 8. The site - Early efforts • Previous developer proposed to demolish and build over much of the existing buildings existing proposed
- 9. What was the problem? • Preservation is expensive – hard to find developer willing to take on the expense • Town cannot purchase the property outright
- 10. Parallel problem • Easton did not have municipal sewer • North Easton Village homes and commercial properties had failing septic systems • Many failing systems could not be replaced because of lack of adequate discharge fields
- 11. The solution = A public / Private Partnership • Town finds developer experienced in adaptive reuse, mixed-income housing, creative financing • Combination of historic preservation, mixed income housing, and smaller development creates support among multiple Town constituencies • Developer identifies the funding gap that needs to be filled • Town leadership builds support to provide gap financing • Culminates in Town Meeting with overwhelming vote in favor • Town leadership and engineers see opportunity to use the site for neighborhood WWTP
- 12. Community Preservation Act (CPA) Funding • CPA can be used for historic preservation, affordable housing, open space, and outdoor recreation – this development checks 3 of the 4 boxes • Town Meeting approved $7.35M in CPA funding: • $3,000,000 used to purchase a Preservation Restriction on the property, preserving the buildings’ restored facades in perpetuity • $4,350,000 loaned to the development. Loan will be repaid through property cash flow and future capital transactions • Beacon secured letters of credit totaling $7,350,000 to provide extra security to the Town during construction and lease-up • Development structured as a condo to allow potential conversion of market-rate units to for-sale condominiums after historic credit period. Condo sales to repay $4.35M loan.
- 13. Urban Center Housing Tax Increment Financing (UCH-TIF) • Allows Town to freeze property taxes at Shovel Works at pre-development levels • TIF Agreement for 10 years • When units are sold as condos, they pay regular real estate taxes • Town Meeting approved establishment of UCH-TIF District
- 14. Wastewater treatment plant • Town financed, constructed, and now operates WWTP on site • Town Meeting approved issuance of municipal bonds to finance construction • Town also received funding from MassWorks and Massachusetts Wastewater Pollution Abatement Trust • WWTP serves the development (approximately 40% of the flow) and abutting properties • First of several planned neighborhood WWTPs for Easton
- 15. North Easton Village Improvements • Improvements to North Easton Village streetscape • Easton received funding from MassWorks PIC OF No EASTON NOW (Stephanie) before after
- 17. Town-wide Comprehensive Wastewater Management Plan (2004) • Identified need for sewer improvements / infrastructure throughout Easton • North Easton Village - Highest Priority • Within Town’s Aquifer Protection District • Many properties with failing on- site septic systems • Development of commercial properties limited due to lack of sewer infrastructure/capacity
- 18. Wastewater Solution • Opportunity for partnership between Beacon and Town to address a significant need • Previous development proposal had included a WWTP for the proposed redevelopment project only • Locate a municipal WWTP on a private site • Expand WWTP to accommodate additional properties in North Easton Village • WWTP capacity expanded to treat up to 50,000 gpd – includes approximately 70 parcels in North Easton Village • Provide relief to properties that could not replace failing systems on-site • Provide capacity for commercial development in village center • Town funds construction of WWTP • Beacon provides the location of WWTP and portion of SAS • Significant utility infrastructure to support the residential development and the WWTP serving the surrounding properties
- 19. Maximize Use of Site • Site constrained by Queset Brook to the south, rail line to the east, Main Street to the west and Oliver Street to the north • Soil absorption systems located under the parking area and area identified as park/green space • Stormwater management areas located between buildings and incorporated into the landscape • Contextual design integrates WWTP (mechanical and exterior) seamlessly into new development
- 20. Give and Take – Making it Work
- 21. Master Planning • Beacon’s proposal was more sensitive to the site’s history than the previous proposal, allowing it to go forward • The challenge became; what can be saved, what is historically significant; what configuration will make this successful
- 22. Master Planning • Beacon’s proposal was more sensitive to the site’s history than the previous proposal, allowing it to go forward • The challenge became; what can be saved, what is historically significant; what configuration will make this successful
- 23. Marketable space • First floor direct entry units occupy full width of the building • Second floor flats open onto corridor on one side that runs the full length of the building, recalling the grandeur of the original space
- 24. Entries • Windows were selectively removed and converted into entry alcoves for first floor units or “pass-throughs” to facilitate circulation through site
- 25. Roof trusses • Geometry of trusses allowed for loft spaces within • Addition of dormers admit natural light
- 26. Roof trusses • Initial impressions • Challenging layouts • Structural reinforcement
- 27. Roof trusses • Metal building had similar potential for living space within trusses
- 28. Infill • Peeling away the extraneous 20th century shed additions (“hodgepodge”) • Seeing what remains • Deciding how to infill existing openings
- 29. Dormers • Worked with National Park Service and local historical commission to arrive at a compromise about where new dormers would be appropriate
- 31. Context • 1.5 acre public park • Restoration of Oliver Ames Memorial • Recovery of “Town” Bell
- 32. Context • Discovery of Water Wheel
- 33. Existing Site • Overabundance of rocky fill • Waste product or valuable resource?
- 34. Lemonade from Lemons • Reclaimed stone mulch as unifying landscape element • Granite boulders reused as seating elements and landscape features
- 35. Walkways • Angular layout reinforces industrial dynamic of site • Convergent actions expressed at nodes
- 36. Plant Palette • Signature Selections (Olmsted Brothers at Rockery) • Drought tolerant / adaptive palette
- 37. HISTORICALLY SENSITIVE • Historically sensitive and contemporary landscape response • Creative use of available resources with an aggressive budget
- 38. COMPLEX SITE REQUIRES FLEXIBILITY • Design build effort & multiple trades on site • Quantifying boulders & stone • Cleaning & storing “tailings”
- 39. Questions?