THE DREW CONDOMINIUM - LEVEREGING THE HIDDEN DIMENSION

By Catarina Ferreira, AIA

Condo conversions are happening throughout Washington DC at an extraordinary speed. Everywhere you turn it seems single-family row houses are suddenly becoming 5,7, 10-unit buildings overnight. Many of these smaller scale multi-unit buildings throughout our city end up being pretty much the same: a box with a bay window on one side (levering projections into public space, of course), and perhaps a penthouse, unless that triggers hefty payments to the Housing Development Fund, in which case we get a dumb box sticking up on one side, providing roof deck access (a must have). And guess what, the apartments sell, the developers make their money, life goes on. However, this is not architecture, it is production. it is unfortunate, given that this project scale holds the opportunity for so much inventiveness.

Given their unique position in-between scales, every design decision must be carefully considered, as it can either trigger the additional code requirements of larger buildings or avoid them altogether. It is in leveraging that hidden dimension in between building scales that an investor’s ROI is truly maximized. Pushing the limits on building size, number of dwelling units, and efficiency are obvious strategies for doing so, inventiveness, design quality, and quality of space not so much. When the focus is on profits at all costs, the outcome is never pretty, regardless of what industry we are talking about.

Many of our multi-unit residential projects hover in that scale between 3/4 story row house and 4/5 story mid-rise buildings. Ranging from 2 to 10 dwelling units, many are literally on the edge in terms of egress/access code, as well as zoning constraints. In a nutshell, most have all of the requirements of much larger buildings, but none of the repetition. Each is a 3-d puzzle waiting to be solved. I call them ‘in-between projects.’ They are a though nut to crack, but a satisfying one. Often the best solution lies in a blurry line hidden between meeting the project brief and pushing the zoning/code constraints to their limit, both to maximize the building size and number of units or their quality, often both.

Let’s look at our Sherman II project, currently under construction as a test case.

In this project, the intent was to maintain the majority of the building facade, one of two identical facades side by side. Both buildings were once owned by Charles Drew, an African-American pioneer in the development of the technology behind blood transfusions. Find out more about Dr. Dew here. We wanted to keep the majority of the facade in place instead of erasing its history. Keeping a facade, adding to it, and ending up with something other than a Frankenstein of a building is pretty hard to do.

This is a 3-unit project, but generously sized 3-bedroom apartments. There were no tough constraints here at first glance. We could have accommodated the 3 dwelling units within what was previously a 2-story building, with perhaps a rear addition. Done, cheaper to build, and the units would probably sell. Facade could have been 100% maintained, as was done next door. Done.

Why bother? Needless to say, we took the project the project in a different direction.

In this case, maximizing the number of units was not the goal, due to Zoning constraints. Providing large, quality units was the goal. By pushing against the limits of allowable building height at the rear, while keeping it 1/2 story of so lower at the front, allowing the existing facade to breathe and helping to maintain the scale of the block of two semi-detached buildings. In doing so, we helped the developer create a larger building, with more sell-able sq ft, and all the units created are 3 bedrooms. Creating family-sized units was a crucial aspect of the project, as it is located in a 2-unit max. Zoning District, and BZA relief was required in order to construct 3 dwellings. The abnormally large lot size opened the door for this possibility.

In addition to getting larger units, our stepping the building height towards the back also allowed for the creation of a 1.5 story living room at the top unit, and roof deck towards the front (a must have). Finding a way to get up to that roof deck while meeting zoning constraints was a project onto itself…

Now nearing the end of construction, the project is coming together, and one can start to see what is to come. The bonus 1/2 story we created, with its access to the roof deck and the perch over the spacious living room below, is a real plus. Every morning, whoever lives here, will walk-out of their bedrooms and walk towards this, as the sun rises, then descend to the spacious living room level overlooking Sherman Ave NW.

Occupying the upper story while walking towards the roof deck, the sensation is one of being suspended in space, in an in-between dimension no one knew existed.

WHEN EVERY INCH MATTERS

Yesterday we obtained BZA approval for our Colorado Condominium building, a ground up 5-unit development coming up near Georgia Ave NW. Obtaining approval for what amounted o 3 variances and 2 special exceptions was not easy, and required a very strategic balancing act between developer goals, community/ANC desires and the Zoning Regulations. The building consist of 3 stories, cellar and penthouse, and 3 2-bedroom and 2 1-bedroom dwelling units in a mere 3,690 sq ft.

The original building proposed was larger and required a variance for increasing FAR. Early in our coordination efforts with the ANC and the Office of Planning, it became clear that in order for us to obtain approval for a higher density development it was important that it include one affordable unit. As a result, we opted into Inclusionary Zoning, allowing us to increase the FAR of the building without the need for an additional variance. While other variances were still required, they resulted from the higher FAR allowable under IZ guidelines. We would have to propose a much smaller building, however.

In order for the project to remain viable it was important that it contain at least 5 quality dwelling units. Fitting that many units into the framework we were working with was like solving a 3-D puzzle. Here are some of the ways we were able to increase the use of the very limited square footage we had to work with:

• ground level units are accessed directly from the side of the building, eliminating the need for redundant interior circulation;

• shared stairs/hallways are minimized. The building has a mere 116 sq ft of shared space, and the efficiency rate is just under 97%.

• we took advantage of planar and sectional relationships between various building elements, by interweaving them in a ying-yang manner;

• we manipulated the building height by creating an attic level, allowing us to stack a stack up to the penthouse 1/2 outside the footprint of the penthouse itself, which needed to comply with setback requirements;

• we created a series of pivoting bay window boxes that allowed us to gain living space on the interior of the each unit as needed due to interior layout constraints, without being constrained by consistent exterior walls;

• we employed an exterior stair as the second means of egress, avoiding unnecessary increases to FAR.

The circulation spine of the building, with only a front entrance vestibule and one flight of stairs as shared space.

Back to back duplexes occupy the 1st floor and cellar levels.

The 2nd floor contains a 1-bedroom unit at the front, and 1/2 a 1-bedroom duplex at the rear.

The 3rd floor contains the bedroom and bathroom for the 2nd floor duplex unit, along with the main level of a 2-bedroom duplex unit that also occupies the penthouse.

Although they appear to be merely formal in nature at first glance, the pivoting bay window boxes are tools to help us solve our 3-D puzzle, as mentioned previously, and to help us to address the surrounding context. They break up the building vertically, serving as a way to break down the scale of the building with respect to smaller neighbors to the South, and provide a sculptural response to this building on a corner lot abutting an alley. The lowest of the boxes in similar in scale to front porches of the neighboring buildings, further helping to bridge between the older buildings and ours.

BETTER TOGETHER

In many areas throughout Washington DC, mixed use/commercial zoning districts are adjacent to residential districts, creating large disparities in scale at their borderline, often between one side of the street and another, or between a corner and the rest of the block.

Following on my previous post regarding design strategies for pop-up additions to traditional row houses, I would like to share some early images of a new project on the boards that is, to say the least, the Mother of all Pop-Ups. It happens to be in a mixed use district, which allows much larger buildings than the single family traditional row dwellings that currently existing along that block. With that in mind, we are approaching the design our our 12 unit building as a prototype that could potentially be repeated down the block, or at least a portion of it, creating a larger scale version of the rhythm that exists along traditional blocks of row dwellings throughout the city.

The Mother of All Pop-Ups

Better Together

While our proposed building by itself towers over its neighbors, when repeated as module it becomes a playful reinterpretation of the smaller traditional blocks or row dwellings surrounding it, and can act as an effective bridge between the scale of the row dwellings and that of nearby commercial buildings.

As we all know, many traditional row house blocks were designed as repeating modules, and were often built as blocks at one time, not individual buildings, resulting in beautiful rhythmic streets.

Of course, designing prototypes that work well as a larger group and allow for the creation of more (much needed) dwelling units without sticking out like a sore thumb sounds great from a planning stand point, but given that each row dwelling is owned by a different family, it is not the most realistic approach. But who knows? Hopefully at least one of the neighboring buildings will go up for sale one of these days…

EMBRACING THE POP-UP

Let’s face it: pop-ups are going to continue to be built all over DC, whether we like them or not. Entire streets are being disfigured, both by clumsy top story additions and by the insensitive removal of traditional brick row homes in order to replace them with new, boxy buildings that stick out (an up) like eyesores, don’t respect scale or context, but most definitely maximize FAR.

How can we help property owners and developers build better designed, better integrated, more sensitive pop-ups? Whether row houses are torn down or not, rising about adjacent roof lines is a certainly a tricky design proposition. My default position has often been to try to make it as invisible (or at least discreet) as possible. Then I came across this:

An end of row pop-up original to the building that is anything but discrete… If you look closely you will notice that the same basic facade marches down the block, sans crown.

There many examples of glorious upper stories throughout Washington, that could very well serve as inspiration for tackling this difficult design challenge. Mansard roofs are often employed, along with dormers of various shapes, to cap traditional row homes. I am not advocating that we suddenly start adding traditional looking mansard roofs to row buildings, but rather that we consider pop-ups a design opportunity instead of a faux-pas. After all, zoning regulations allow them, and they will continue to be built (at least outside Historic Districts).

Some of our recent projects attempt to embrace the pop-up as a project type, transforming them into an opportunity to integrate buildings of various scales into existing blocks of row houses. Instead of shying away from visibility, our goal with these projects is to provide architectural design solutions that coexist without having to insult or apologize, that respect their context and try to maintain their integrity simultaneously. After all, good architecture is not style or time specific. Can pop-ups be designed in such a way that they become positive additions to traditional city streets? This is no easy task…

Here are some examples of how we are trying to strike a balance between old vs. new, short vs. tall(er).

In this four unit condominium building we added two stories, roof decks on two levels, and maximized FAR. Traditional pediments march down the traditional brick row, as do front porches. In our project the front porch proportions were maintained but it is reinterpreted as a bay window. The slight angle of the Mansard roof is allowed to continue, instead of being eliminated as is often done. Railings are kept light handed, materials consistent with the color of materials already on the block.

In this five unit condominium building we added two stories and a penthouse, terraces/ roof decks on three levels, and requires BZA relief from FAR limits. Our building bridges scales between a residential and a mixed-use district. The massing is broken down, creating a dialogue with the residential structures along the street.

In this two unit property, a sleek third story and roof deck access penthouse are added onto a traditional brick row house that is repeated down the block. A Mansard roof and dormers delicately lift the building up with minimum disruption to the facade.

On one of the few blocks in Columbia Heights where Mansard roofs have survived, we propose enlarging the building while maintaining the its general massing. FAR are maximized in this three unit building through the use of a bay window and a discrete 4th story addition. A Mansard roof and dormer morph to become a cantilevered bay window, creating a ying/yang relationship between the various building elements.

In this 3 unit building a glass volume wraps around an existing semi-detached row house, and reveals itself on the front facade through a bay window addition. 1.5 stories and a roof deck were added.

Finally, in this most typical of DC row house blocks, a new five unit condominium co-exists with traditional row houses while accommodating an additional story and roof deck. Alterations to the facade, such as larger openings and a bay window help to integrate old and new. A spiral stair to the new roof deck is celebrated, becoming a crowning element in the new facade composition.