HOUSE WITH NO STYLE

by Catarina Ferreira, AIA

Let’s face it, renovations are tricky, even more so when the patient in question is a difficult one. As architects, we sometimes need to have the gift of foresight: the ability to see what is not yet there.

In this add/alt project in Bethesda MD, currently on the boards, the challenges are many: an oddly located front door, barely visible; a way too prominent a garage, a multitude of levels and rooflines with no apparent rhyme or reason, a strange disposition of spaces, with the kitchen on a different level than the entertaining spaces, main bedroom and kids’ bedrooms on separate floors, etc. Our scope involves addressing all of that while improving the house’s curb appeal and renovating dated interior spaces.

A second story addition provides the opportunity to create a new primary suite on the same level as the children’s bedrooms, while allowing us to change the house’s problematic massing. Rooflines are the theme here, so we are going with it and trying to make sense of it all.

DOUBLE VISION

by Catarina Ferreira, AIA

Construction at our mixed use building at 1400 9th St NW is finally picking up momentum. The initial phases of building facade stabilization, foundations and underpinning were technically difficult to accomplish and took several months to complete. Now, with framing nearing completion, the project is finally materializing and starting to look like a building , or is it two?

Located in the Shaw Historic District, the original building was built around 1850, making it one of the oldest (if not the oldest) contributing structures within the historic district. Vacant for decades and in poor condition, the building was nearing collapse when purchased at auction. The initial concept presented to the HPRB for review requested the demolition of the existing structure and replaced with an entirely new building. That concept was rejected, after board members visited the site and determined that the building could be salvaged. Then our job became a lot more difficult…

Typically, visible additions to existing contributing structures are not permitted. The project would not be viable without an increase in building area. Our second proposal to the HPRB, which underwent a smooth review process and was quickly approved, consisted of additions/alterations to the existing building, including a four story addition on the North side of the where a non-original structure previously existed. Conceptually, it made total sense. From a design stand-point, it seemed like an impossible mission. How could we create a coherent whole out of two such different parts? To complicate matters even more, the building occupies a corner site, making an alterations proposed very prominent. It also has no preferred orientation, and it seems that has always been the case. Is 9th St the front of is O St the front? It’s like it’s trying to be two buildings at once.

Sometimes the problem becomes the solution.

The European in me would have sought a clear distinction between old and new, so that was the starting point. However, in this case it was not just a matter of design a new building next to the old one. The original building required a significant amount of repair work and its 9th St elevation (the actual facade based on the building’s address) lacked coherence. Several poorly-designed alterations had been made over the last 170 years or so.

Sometimes the answer is not about black vs. white but rather shades of grey. The ultimate solution is a hybrid building that blurs the line between old and new just enough to make a passer-by do a double take. It looks like one building from farther away, like two up close. This allowed the integrity of the historic structure to be maintained, allowed us to propose a clean addition that is distinct yet compatible, and most importantly, one does not try to mimic/reproduce the existing building.

Often, in Washington DC, the tendency is to mimic the appearance of historic structures or to propose a slightly watered down version of them in order to try to achieve compatibility. That erasure of history, by replicating a historic language in the present, reduces the proposed and the original building to nothing more than their appearance. To me, architecture is about poetry, creating a rich experience by manipulating the grey zone, not about superficiality/appearance. Historic districts are first and foremost about a coherent atmosphere.

So how did we achieve a coherent atmosphere/ historic compatibility in this case?

1. My number one go-to strategy in historic district is always simplicity: simple massing, discrete character.

2. Then comes soul/personality: In this case, is it one building or two? It seemed important to maintain that duality. Also, a raw, slightly industrial aesthetic is proposed in both parts of the building. I feel this is compatible with the character of this particular historic district, where alleys are streets, carriage houses are homes, and just a dash of grit prevails.

3. Then comes continuity of materials: same brick color/size, same siding material on bay windows, same window color, despite different geometry/size.

Now that it has taken shape, the verdict is in: it is one building, but its also two at the same time, as has always been the case. Amazingly, I think it actually works!

THE BUILDING THAT WASN'T (YET)

by Catarina Ferreira, AIA

Some projects seem too good to be true. I’m sure many architects out there can relate to this. After all, my firm had already designed two other buildings for that block and half, both of which are currently under construction. Three buildings within 1.5 blocks? No way, I thought. No way was correct.

A few months ago, I was asked to prepare a conceptual design for a 40-unit multi-unit apartment building to be located on 1322 9th NW. The site has been a parking lot for as long as anyone can remember. Various projects have been proposed for that site and one by one they were all abandoned. This one was charmed, though, or so it seemed.

When a hotel was proposed for the site a couple of years ago, there was strong opposition from the neighborhood; everyone wanted more housing. There were also several zoning relief requests associated with that proposal. So, we gave them more housing, with no need for zoning relief. There was no neighborhood opposition to the proposed building, no ANC opposition, and we were slated for HPRB concept approval this past April in the consent calendar, postponed to May due an adjoining neighbor’s expressing some concerns regarding the view of his historic courtyard being blocked from the parking lot, street and alley by the proposed building. Well, no offense, but the beauty of courtyards is that they are intimate, mostly enclosed exterior spaces and they are best experienced by being in them, not from the outside. How about giving private tours? Just saying… I would have enjoyed attending that hearing for sure, but the application was withdrawn before the hearing date.

So, how exactly did this project get derailed after such a promising start, you may wonder…

Interest rates rose between the time the purchase deal was made and the concept (almost) approved. Current interest rates have had an enormous impact on developers’ ability to bring projects from concept to reality. Construction loans are often interest only, variable rate loans. With current interest rates, developers (and borrowers in general) are paying twice as much in interest on any loan. When you need a few million to get a project built, twice as much is a lot. In addition, when the cost of money is so high and construction costs are also high, it’s a double obstacle: paying twice as much at twice the cost of money. Given those obstacles, a lower purchase price was needed in order for the project to be viable, so the original purchase deal fell through.

Luckily, the HPRB’s position towards the proposed design does not change regardless of who the buyer is, and we, as architects, own the design concept, not the previous would-be purchaser. The concept can be re-presented to the board if a new buyer appears with the intent of building the same project type.

A BUILDING WITHIN A BUILDING

by Catarina Ferreira, AIA

Our 9 unit + office mixed-use building on 9th St NW, in the Shaw and Naylor Court Historic Districts, is well into construction. Underpinning was just completed. It was no easy task.

At first glance, the design proposal looks like a building on top of a building, but in reality, and as far as construction is concerned, it is a building within a building. The construction photos below make this clear.

What looks like an enclosed space in the photo above are actually foundation walls for an exterior sideyard in the central part of the building.

In order to preserve the existing historic carriage house at the rear of the building, a series of steel beams were introduced in order to create a temporary bridge under which to excavate, underpin foundation walls, and eventually frame the first two stories of the building. Once the existing structure is supported by the new construction under/within it, the steel ‘bridge’ will be removed and construction can progress upwards, in a logical sequence, instead of downwards, as has been the case up to now.

While the end result appears to be simple, it’s easy to underestimate the complexity of building a project such as this.

The proposed alterations to the carriage house, with taller portion of building visible beyond.

The end result will be not so much an addition onto a historic building, but rather a sleek, contemporary new building within the original historic structure.