The two primary concerns I raised were: 1) the loss of idendity of the single family/farm house structure with all the additions connected to it, and 2) the size (detail design elements are still to be worked out) of the townhouse. It is 3 stories tall and +/-90 feet deep. Parking is a toss up with many good points for and against having more than the 4 proposed spaces.

The Design Committee will be meeting on Tues March 16th at 733 Euclid St.at 6:30pm People are encouraged to attend and make their views known.

If you’re not growing, you’re dying, and that’s what this property was doing. I am happy to see an ambitious and respectful plan to get some people in the house.

This is a developer (and architects) with an excellent track record. As a neighbor, I sincerely hope to see them be able to work with this property.

Here’s hoping that neighborhood busybodies don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

The developer may intend on maintaining some balustrades and/or saving some moldings but to fit in that many (14) dwelling units requires an intensive cutting-up of the interior to such a degree that the contractor might as well (and potentially is planning to) remove all interior framing and partitions such that once demolition is complete, they are left with an historic skin to be packed with new (small) apartments. Divide 14,000 by 14 and you get 1,000 square feet – generous 1 or 2 bedroom units – but with necessary new plumbing chases, new HVAC to support 14 dwelling units, and the corridors and vertical circulation space, you’re left with much less than 1,000 square average per unit to work with. I’m interested to know the actual average unit size; maybe 600 or 700 square feet each? Reminds me of some of the brownstones-cum-SRO’s in Bed Stuy Brooklyn, most of which have been taken back to their single-family with English basement glory. Is the proposed1922 3rd Street project movement in the wrong direction?

What’s important about the addition: reviewing and understanding the construction details and getting hold of actual material samples. This is the only way to be certain that the builder will execute an addition that evokes quality and character of the original home. But please do not be fooled: when you add substantially to a home like this, what was original can never be replicated and what is new will never be of the same quality and character; it would make the project too high-end and therefore unfeasible for the developer. The addition will be clearly a new structure (as it should be) and the integrity of the original home will be lost if the addition tries to attach to and blend with the original.

I believe in an approach where the preservation efforts are rigorous and meticulous, inside and out; appropriately modernizing kitchens and baths, opening up the plan a bit, but preserving the exterior, and reusing interior elements appropriately. New structures added to the site should be clearly not historic and not try to be, resulting in a defined contrast. Attachments or connective tissue should be strategic and surgical, not glommed on and overwhelming. Let’s allow the new to be new in a contemporary, subtle, understated way that operates to highlight and celebrate the original building while standing on its own as a contemporary addition to the site.

That the developers are architects says little about the project. Unfortunately for us all, there are oodles of unskilled, untalented Architects throughout the DC area. I challenge the developers to find a middle ground between maximizing profit and a project that considers not only the site and existing structures but its context, its place in the city, and a more inventive solution that sets precedent for future projects of this type.

I am glad to see the positive comments and am very proud to represent this developer. Two of the Principals are architects. I believe they are purposeful and sensitive to the neighborhoods and the environment in their design approach.

We were admittedly surprised to see this post, however, we appreciate that it is thoughtfully done. The developer is at the very beginning of the due diligence period, so none of this is a done deal at this point.

if the neighborhood is concerned about parking, how about looking into the new units not being eligible for RPP? it’s been done in ward 6, i wonder if could be done in ledroit park.