Micro-Units for Dupont Mansion Receive HPRB Support

• February 28, 2014
• 3 Comments

by Lark Turner

A rendering of the proposal from SB-Urban and Hartman-Cox.

A plan to redevelop Dupont Circle’s Patterson House got the design go-ahead from the Historic Preservation Review Board (HPRB) on Thursday.

In the current plan, the building will contain about 90 furnished micro-units coming in on the bigger end of “micro” at 350 square feet. They would not have parking, and residents would share first-floor space including the building’s old ballroom.

Developer SB-Urban, which has yet to finalize its purchase of the property, is working with architect Hartman-Cox on the project. The exterior will be clad in three types of glass, with a back addition built of a light-colored brick. The use of glass earned HPRB members’ praise on Thursday.

“I like this a lot,” said HPRB member Joseph Taylor, who added that the glass would complement the Patterson House’s white exterior. “It allows it to be big, tall but less imposing than it really is.”

The big test for the project will come next week when developers seek a parking exception from the Board of Zoning Adjustment. Another micro-unit project in the area was stymied by that board last month, mostly because of a desire to construct a project with no parking spaces.

This article originally published at https://dc.urbanturf.com/articles/blog/patterson_house_redesign_gets_hprb_go-ahead/8183

3 Comments

1. LoganBill said at 11:59 am on Friday February 28, 2014:

   Last I read, all of the main rooms on the second floor will be preserved.  The first floor is not worth saving except for the marble vestibule, foyer and staircase.  What will happen to the original furnishings, art work and fixtures??  What assurances are there that the developer will not gut the whole interior.  Wish the hotel concept went through.  The public would have access to the interior.

1. Adam L said at 3:28 pm on Friday February 28, 2014:

   Feel the exact same way as LoganBill. A hotel would be preferred, but it is what it is. I don’t know if there is any way to protect the interior, other than designating the building as a historic landmark (the highest level of protection, which is rightly the most difficult to achieve).

1. Luke said at 7:48 pm on Friday February 28, 2014:

   The building is already a landmark, and one could seek interior designation (there are a few in DC), but the developer intends to restore, not gut, the interior public spaces.