No objection to general concept design for the siting and massing of the Athletic Training Facility as shown in supplemental drawings dated 5 April 2012. Recommend further study of intersection with McDonough Gymnasium and architectural vocabulary in general. File new submission of concept design development drawings for review by the Commission.
Dear Mr. Reed:
In its meeting of 19 April, the Commission of Fine Arts reviewed a general concept design for the new athletic training facility at Georgetown University, 3700 O Street, NW (case number OG 11-282). The Commission approved the general concept for the overall siting and disposition of the program with the following recommendations for the development of the design.
The Commission members supported the general approach of organizing the facility with two levels of stacked basketball courts situated to the east of the existing McDonough Gymnasium, and secondary spaces located south of the courts. In general, they recommended that the gymnasium courts be presented as the dominant volume, rather than obscured by smaller–scale architectural elements reminiscent of the adjacent residential buildings. They cited the clear articulation of the adjacent McDonough Gymnasium as a vigorously expressed form flanked by subordinate auxiliary spaces; they recommended a similarly robust and simple treatment for the primary gymnasium volume, such as was illustrated in the south elevation of the 2011 concept design.
For the ancillary elements of the building, the Commission members requested additional study of the east elevation to establish a more resolved terminus to North Road, possibly incorporating the east entrance; likewise, they recommended simplification of the west elevation, particularly at the connection between the proposed structure and the existing gymnasium. They raised concerns about the undefined relationship of the two-story portion of the facility to the adjacent road on the south, suggesting that the building be brought closer to the road or perhaps extended with a raised terrace. They also emphasized the opportunity for treating large flat roofs as either occupiable spaces or green roofs.
The Commission's comments support and augment those made by the Old Georgetown Board in its meeting of April 5; the Board's report is enclosed. The Commission and Board look forward to reviewing further development of the design concept. As always, the staff is available to assist you with the next submission.
/s/Thomas E. Luebke, FAIA
Director of Intercollegiate Athletics
37th and O Streets, NW
Washington, DC 20057
cc: Regina Bleck, Georgetown University
William Gridley, Bowie Gridley Architects
Enclosure: Report of the Old Georgetown Board, 19 April 2012
OG 11-282 (HPO 11-492)
3700 O Street, NW
(Square 1321, Lot 827)
Georgetown University – Athletic Training
Concept – revised design
(Reviewed: 1 Mar. 2012, 6 Oct. 2011; 4 Oct., 5 Jul. 2007 – OG 07-185B)
REPORT: The Old Georgetown Board (OGB) has reviewed concept designs for the proposed Athletic Training Facility, a four–story structure plus one underground level to be built adjacent to the southeast corner of McDonough Gymnasium located near the western (central) edge of the Georgetown University campus. In its meeting of 5 April 2012, the OGB recommended a general concept approval for the siting and massing of the proposed structure.
In its two previous reviews of the project, the OGB had urged the applicant to reconsider the siting so as to better accommodate future development on the campus. As ultimately proposed, the building program was reconfigured to stack the two gymnasiums at the northern edge of the site along a service access way and to locate the offices and occupiable support spaces to the south along the southwest campus entrance drive and across from residential buildings on the campus.
In its April review, the OGB encouraged the applicant to study the vocabulary used for the exterior elevations–similar in character to recently built collegiate gothic buildings in this part of the campus–especially the east elevation and the entry bay as well as the connection between the existing gymnasium and the new structure. The Board appreciates the responsiveness to its comments and looks forward to future submissions.