Architectural Review Committee Report: May 2016

Cleveland Park Historical Society Architectural Review Committee

Monday, May 9, 2016

ARC Members attending: Christine Hobbs, Ana Evans, Win Brown, Phil Eagleburger, Danny Ince, Lois Orr, Ron Ngiam, David Kay and Tina Mead.

Also attending was Carin Ruff, CPHS Executive Director

 

HPA 16-345
3512 Rodman Street NW
Rear addition
Architect: Chris Snowber

The proposal includes a two story rear addition to the 1927 house. An existing one story rear addition will be removed to be replaced by the proposed two story addition, a one story breakfast room and patio on the ground level. The addition will have masonry on the first floor, siding on the second floor, and paneling on the breakfast room. Also proposed is a rear shed and a new covered front entry, measuring 6 x 8, replacing a smaller existing portico. New windows will be added on the east side. The neighbors have been contacted.

The ARC has no objection to the proposal. However, the ARC recommends that the addition consist of one material, such as clapboard, to clearly delineate the addition from the existing house. Since the side indentations are so minimal, 4 inches on each side, material differentiation is particularly important. The ARC also notes that one of the “companion” houses on Rodman has also added an enlarged front entry.

The motion passed 9-0.

 

HPA #16-382
3703 Reno Rd.
Rear addition, driveway modifications
Architect: Charles Warren

The proposal includes a two and a half story rear addition to the 1928 house and driveway modifications. The addition would measure 22 x 14, be set back from the existing house 18 inches on both sides, and include a deck on the third level. The curb cut would be widened and the driveway would be expanded from eight to twelve feet. The front retaining wall and side steps would be rebuilt. The neighbors have been contacted, with several comments still outstanding.

The ARC has no objection to the proposal. However, the ARC suggests that there be greater differentiation between the second and third stories of the addition, so that the first two stories read as primary and the third story as a secondary, dormer-like structure. Also, the ARC recommends that the widening of the driveway me made to read as a sidewalk by using a different material than the concrete driveway along the walking strip.

The motion passed 9-0.