halrb/design review committee report...p:\dwg-temp\temp-2\2900 facade\transmit\2900 columbia...

P:\dwg-temp\temp-2\2900 FACADE\TRANSMIT\2900 Columbia Pike.DARCEYLLC.docx HALRB/Design Review Committee Report Meeting Date: September 3, 2014 For DRC (circle those present): Robert Dudka, Charles Craig, Charles Matta, Andrew Wenchel, Tova Solo, Erin May, Joan Lawrence For Arlington County (circle those present): Cynthia Liccese-Torres, Rebeccah Ballo, John Liebertz Case # 14-22 Agenda Item #4 Application Complete Application Incomplete Applicant(s): Darcey, LLC For Applicant(s): (See attached application for applicant, address, name of property and property description, drawings, photographs, and proposed scope of work.) Design Recommendations: ARCHITECTS RESPONSE IN RED 1. Correct side elevation (incorrectly drawn) and update other photo simulations and drawings. RESPONSE: Refer to construction document A3.1 attached 2. Retain/repair roof tiles; consider looking for salvaged tiles. RESPONSE: Refer to elevation note (EN:3) on A2.0 & A2.1 which addresses the roof tile 3. New window on front elevation – moved header up to match adjacent window height. RESPONSE: Refer to note and elevation change on A3.1 4. New single-leaf door on the side elevation – add transom to match height of the adjacent windows to the south. RESPONSE: Refer to note and elevation change on A3.1. However, aligning the transom as requested would look awkward and is unnecessary (unless we went with a 8'-6"h door). Refer to existing front elevation door to window height relationships. We would prefer to go with what is indicated on 1/A3.1 5. New front door should be of similar design to the existing, but may include glass. RESPONSE: Door TBD and it's specification will be submitted at a later date for approval. The new door and door surround's appropriateness will be taken into consideration 6. Choose more appropriate lighting to the Spanish Revival style of the building RESPONSE: Exterior lights TBD and their specification/s will be submitted at a later date for approval. The new light fixture's appropriateness will be taken into consideration 7. Consider repair of the existing metal windows; please include specification for proposed windows showing design, material, profile, etc. RESPONSE: Will provide for approval 8. For canopies, show drawing with and without (DRC likely will prefer it without canopies as the arched windows are a character defining element of the building) RESPONSE: No canopies per A3.1 are called for 9. Include specification sheets and details for all proposed materials. 10. RESPONSE: Will provide at a later date for approval 11. Study signage. RESPONSE: Will provide at a later date for approval Findings:

Upload: others

Post on 31-Jan-2021

2 views

Category:

Documents

0 download

Report

Download

Embed Size (px):

TRANSCRIPT

P:\dwg-temp\temp-2\2900 FACADE\TRANSMIT\2900 Columbia Pike.DARCEYLLC.docx

HALRB/Design Review Committee Report Meeting Date: September 3, 2014 For DRC (circle those present): Robert Dudka, Charles Craig, Charles Matta, Andrew Wenchel,

Tova Solo, Erin May, Joan Lawrence For Arlington County (circle those present): Cynthia Liccese-Torres, Rebeccah Ballo, John Liebertz

Case # 14-22 Agenda Item #4

Application Complete Application Incomplete

Applicant(s): Darcey, LLC For Applicant(s): (See attached application for applicant, address, name of property and property description, drawings, photographs, and proposed scope of work.) Design Recommendations: ARCHITECTS RESPONSE IN RED

1. Correct side elevation (incorrectly drawn) and update other photo simulations and drawings. RESPONSE: Refer to construction document A3.1 attached

2. Retain/repair roof tiles; consider looking for salvaged tiles. RESPONSE: Refer to elevation note (EN:3) on A2.0 & A2.1 which addresses the roof tile

3. New window on front elevation – moved header up to match adjacent window height. RESPONSE: Refer to note and elevation change on A3.1

4. New single-leaf door on the side elevation – add transom to match height of the adjacent windows to the south.

RESPONSE: Refer to note and elevation change on A3.1. However, aligning the transom as

requested would look awkward and is unnecessary (unless we went with a 8'-6"h door). Refer to

existing front elevation door to window height relationships. We would prefer to go with what is

indicated on 1/A3.1

5. New front door should be of similar design to the existing, but may include glass. RESPONSE: Door TBD and it's specification will be submitted at a later date for approval. The

new door and door surround's appropriateness will be taken into consideration

6. Choose more appropriate lighting to the Spanish Revival style of the building RESPONSE: Exterior lights TBD and their specification/s will be submitted at a later date for

approval. The new light fixture's appropriateness will be taken into consideration

7. Consider repair of the existing metal windows; please include specification for proposed windows showing design, material, profile, etc.

RESPONSE: Will provide for approval

8. For canopies, show drawing with and without (DRC likely will prefer it without canopies as the arched windows are a character defining element of the building)

RESPONSE: No canopies per A3.1 are called for

9. Include specification sheets and details for all proposed materials. 10. RESPONSE: Will provide at a later date for approval

11. Study signage. RESPONSE: Will provide at a later date for approval

Findings:
P:\dwg-temp\temp-2\2900 FACADE\TRANSMIT\2900 Columbia Pike.DARCEYLLC.docx

Return to next DRC meeting X Send to HALRB on Discussion Agenda

COMMENTS BY SCOTT GREENBERG (project manager) for GORDON & GREENBERG ARCHITECTS 9/4/14
2EN1EN

1EN

1EN

1EN

3EN

3EN 3EN

3EN

3EN

4EN

4EN4EN

5EN

6EN 6EN 6EN

6EN 6EN

6EN

7EN

8EN

9EN

9EN

9EN

11EN

12EN

12EN

12EN

12EN

#EN
ADDITIONAL ELEVATION PHOTOS

DESCRIPTIVE NOTES OF THE

EXISTING CONDITION BUILDING

EXTERIOR

FRONT FACADE

REAR FACADE

SIDE FACADE
#EN

2900 Columbia Pike.DARCEYLLCA2.1-Layout1A2.2-Layout1A3.0-Layout1A3.1-Layout1