|
|
|
Articles
|
| Brown church expansion OKed |
VOICE writes, "BY BEN WEINSTEIN
The city’s Historic Preservation Review Board approved a proposal to expand Capitol Hill’s Brown Memorial AME Church last month, but there is some neighborhood opposition to the plans. The church still needs approval to use adjacent public space for the expansion and might also need zoning approvals.
The project’s developer, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman, needed design approval from the preservation board because the church, at 130 14th St. NE, falls within the Capitol Hill Historic District.
The Northeast Capitol Hill advisory neighborhood commission, Capitol Hill Restoration Society and the North Lincoln Park Neighborhood Association all opposed the project, saying the expansion would intrude on public space — the historic small triangular park called Reservation 236 that fronts the church.
At its March meeting, the neighborhood commission unanimously voted against the project, noting that it would “encroach on several hundred square feet of a historic landmark adjacent to the church’s property.”
“The seizure of any portion of Reservation 236 for private use will compromise the integrity of L'Enfant's Plan,” the commission wrote in a letter to the preservation board. “If allowed in this instance, it opens the door for future requests. The cumulative effect of allowing even small pieces of reservations to be appropriated for private use is akin to death by a thousand cuts.”"
|
The church has proposed additions to the front and side of the building, with the front, or eastern, portion extending onto public space.
The civic groups argued against allowing a walkway, or any other private-use structures, on the public green space.
“We must insist that the plans for Brown AME be redrawn so that the building does not intrude on this historic landmark and that no portion of the park is appropriated for private use,” the neighborhood commission wrote.
The Capitol Hill Restoration Society has argued for the preservation of the area’s triangular parks, calling them public assets needed in dense urban environments.
“[The society] does not support an encroachment into Reservation 236, particularly one that does not serve a public entity,” member Nancy Metzger testified to the preservation board.
“We are fortunate that a number of our reservations still have the 1880’s iron post and chain fencing, erected by the Office of Public Buildings and Grounds,” Metzger’s testimony states. “If Reservation 236 were enclosed with the historic fencing, would this encroachment proposal have been made? We’re pretty sure the answer is ‘no’ and we do not feel this reservation should be treated differently simply because its boundaries were not marked with fencing.”
Brown AME representatives told the neighborhood commission that church functions now must take place in either the sanctuary or the basement, and the addition would allow room for Sunday school classes and office space. They said the expansion would not increase space for Sunday services and therefore would not encourage an increase in the number of congregants.
They also said the project would improve “wheelchair accessibility and better accommodate its aging population’s entrance into the sanctuary,” according to the neighborhood commission report. Both the wheelchair ramp off the southern side of the building and the new front stairs would be on public space, according to the report.
The neighborhood commission called the plan’s handicap-accessibility elements a “laudable goal.” And its zoning committee noted that the “addition uses materials and a design that the Committee thought was compatible with the existing structure.”
But commissioners asked the church to redesign the project to take it out of the triangle park.
In its report recommending approval of the project, the preservation board staff called the design “largely compatible with its historic neighbors.” Regarding the use of public space, the preservation board report states “only a portion of the handicapped ramp [would be] in public space, which is the case with a host of handicapped ramps throughout the District.”
“The encroachment in to the public space will not result in the loss of mature landscaping nor will it radically alter the appearance of the existing triangular shaped green space,” the report states.
The preservation staff also said that pursuing alternatives, such as building the main entrance on the side rather than the front of the building, would make it incompatible with the “relationship between the church building and the public space. … As well, the result would be an awkwardly designed front elevation, which would not be in keeping with the established pattern of development of churches in the District.”
|
Posted on Apr 13, 2008 22:40pm.
(Return)
|
|
|
|
|
Categories
|
|
|
