Architectural Review Committee Report: January 2015

Monday, January 12, 2015

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

Also attending were Danny Ince, CPHS President and Meghan Mulkerin, CPHS Project Coordinator.

2820 Ordway Street, N.W.
Owner:   Paul and Nancy Piho
Agent: Greg Thomas, Moore Architects

The proposal includes a two-story addition on the east side of the house, a new areaway, basement entrance at the front of the house, modifications to the front retaining wall and new fencing.  Materials on the addition will include reused   existing stone, stucco and paneling on the bay.  The existing windows will be replaced with wood windows.

The plans have been discussed with the neighbors.  However, the ARC still needs to receive copies of the letters of support or the ARC form.

The ARC had no objection to the proposal as presented and supports the proposed size of the “hyphen” between the existing house and the proposed addition.  ARC does not support enlarging the “hyphen” and thus increasing the size of the addition.

The motion passed 9-0.

3601 35th Street, N.W.
Owner:   Baron Bernstein
Agent:  Bruce Hayes, Hayes Architects

Revised plans were presented for this project that was reviewed in December, 2014.  The proposed second floor addition has a flat membrane roof, and casement windows with transoms.  The siding on the second floor will be cedar shake to match the first floor existing.  The garage will be demolished and will not be replaced by a new, larger garage.

The ARC has no objection to the revised plans as presented.

The motion passed 7-2.

3456 Macomb Street, N.W.
Owner:  Thomas Farmer
Agent:  Chris Landis, Landis Construction

The proposal involves the construction of a 2 ½ level elevator shaft for accessibility.  Two proposals for the location of the structure were presented.   Both proposals present the shaft  on the east side of the house, with option two located more to the rear of the back porch.  The neighbor on the east side has been contacted.  The ARC encourages the owner to also contact the rear neighbor.

The ARC has no objection to either option.  However, the ARC prefers option one.

The motion passed 7-2.