Division1
Architects’ Lacey Condo Celebrates DC’s Moment with Communal
Luxury
A building that acknowledges the values
of public civil servants—with style
by Zach Mortice
Associate Editor
How do you .
. . design
a condominium that offers abundant outdoor space on a constricted
urban site and encourages resident engagement and interaction?
Since last fall, when the Washington political establishment began
floating storied Wall Street institutions financial lifeline after
lifeline, a bit of the prestige of directing the world’s largest
economy migrated southward down I-95 from New York. Add this to DC’s
rapidly revitalizing (and gentrifying) neighborhoods and the ever-present
Obama buzz, and the cultural life of the city may yet be ready to
outgrow its New York-induced inferiority complex. All of this means
that there probably isn’t a better time for Division1 Architect’s Lacey condominium building. With this shift in power and prestige comes
an openness to high-design luxury bordering on hedonism—already
established in certain other cities that have unexpectedly found
themselves as supplicants to Washington’s
public money trough. No longer must workaholic policy wonks trudge
home to bland motel-corridored, quasi-retro brick, cookie cutter
apartments. Now is the time for hallway atriums, roof decks, and
sliding glass bedroom doors!
Taking things forward
The Lacey, which opened two months ago, is located in the vibrant
and lively Shaw neighborhood of Northwest D.C., a gentrifying community
that predates Harlem as a center of African-American history and
culture. It’s the most rigorously detailed, definitively
Modern example of what is becoming a
beachhead of contemporary residential design for the 20- to 30-something professional set
in an otherwise preservation-focused city. Its site is blessed
with rich topography and buildings that assert their own strong
personalities. The Lacey is near the base of a hill that lifts
the surrounding neighborhoods out of what was a colonial-era swamp.
Attached to the condo’s north façade
is the Florida Avenue Grill, a venerable neighborhood landmark
established in 1944 by the condo’s namesake: Lacey Wilson.
An early African-American owned business, the restaurant was one
of the few businesses in the area to survive the 1968 riots sparked
by the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr.
Wilson’s son Lacey Wilson Jr. sold the restaurant and its
parking lot to developer Imar Hutchins several years ago with the
intent to build a condominium on it. The pitched-roof, row-house-style
restaurant exudes neighborhood familiarity in a changing urban context.
Across the street, further up the hill to the north looms Cardozo
High School, designed by the St. Louis architect William Ittner in
a grand Collegiate Gothic style and completed in 1916. The Lacey
mirrors Cardozo’s topography. From the street, a retaining
wall demarcates Cardozo’s campus grounds, and the school itself
creates another vertical demarcation further north. Likewise, the
two-story Florida Avenue Grill has the four-story Lacey hovering
above it, creating street valley walls on both sides.
Clearly, the Lacey does not mirror the neighborhood’s formal
design language. Its unabashedly Modern steel and concrete create
a sharp contrast with the buildings that surround it, and this definitive
statement is what makes it work.
“Us showing respect [for the neighborhood] was to move forward
and think forward,” says Ali Honarkar, Assoc. AIA, of Division1
Architects. “We had to come up with a building that had its
own personality and stood on its own.”
Familiar space
The 26-unit Lacey is a bold, boxy presence in a neighborhood of pitched
roof Federal Style row houses. It’s a horizontal rectangle
with a mechanical-looking steel staircase appendage grafted on
the south façade. This staircase runs from the top of the
building down to the ground, recessing into the profile of the
building at the base so that it cantilevers outward. Its airily
screened steel grate structure balances the heavy concrete of the
rest of the building. The east and west façades of the building
are covered in clear and frosted glass panels with black mullions
in varying proportions. Balconies are inserted at irregular intervals
into the curtain wall to break up the composition and create varying
layers of depth, as rear balcony walls are glass as well. Panels
of Viroc (a façade board made of Portland cement and wood
particles) are used to impersonate exposed concrete. The rear western
façade has several slightly cantilevering balconies that
further take a creative and compositional hand to the curtain wall.
Back on the front eastern façade, four dual-level first
floor duplex units have their own landscaped front patios with
stairs to warming, walnut front doors, which bypass the building’s
lobby.
Though the material choices here may be different, Honarkar’s
intent was to create the same front-porch space recognizable to any
resident of a neighborhood of century-old mid-Atlantic row houses
that puts public life in the street and makes urban living vivid
and engaging.
“We wanted to give something back to the community,” he
says. “This is an urban building. It doesn’t hide what
it is.”
Accountability and transparency
Inside, the 24,000-square-foot building is organized around a central
light-filled atrium that runs the full height of the building.
Walkways alternate between the east and west side, one per floor.
The units are all white walls with light colored maple hardwood
floors and sliding glass room partitions. Smaller one bedroom units
are located on the second and third floors, and larger penthouse
units are on the top floor.
Though the building is only four stories tall and is on a constricted
urban site, Division1 managed to give the vast majority of units
a dedicated outdoor space of their own—a patio, balcony, or
roof deck. There are two common roof decks accessible to all, and
the views to Washington’s monumental core and beyond will be
a prime selling point for the building. Finding these kinds of spaces
on this site without repetitively stacking balconies wasn’t
always intuitive and required a resourceful design eye. When a small
square of space below grade that was supposed to be landscaped wasn’t
able to accommodate a tree, Honarkar turned it into a patio that’s
open to they sky for a cellar-level unit.
For a building that pitches its serious design pedigree as a luxury
feature, (its budget was actually a rather modest $7 million, which
probably puts it in a different class than Manhattan
confections by Herzog and de Meuron and the like) it’s not concerned with
perpetuating the typical notion that extreme privacy is the greatest
signifier of design quality. The Lacey’s well-to-do residents
are not sealed away in hermetic chambers of glass, hardwood, and
light. Throughout, the Lacy encourages visual relationships with
neighbors and the surrounding city. It offers views through, beyond,
and between partially glass walled units, especially where the steel
staircase appendage weaves into the rest of the building. Roof decks
also provide views into others’ living
spaces. The interior atrium offers views across all floors so residents
can see their neighbors coming and going. “We wanted neighbors
not to hide from each other,” says Honarkar. “We want
them to engage.”
It’s a concerted push for community in a changing neighborhood
that would probably be unrecognizable (save the Florida Avenue Grill)
for anyone around when the restaurant was new. This design-instilled
sense of enlivening communal voyeurism takes the building beyond
the simple amenity-stacking that doesn’t do anything to get
residents to connect. (A gym so residents can jog on a treadmill,
silently plugged into a television via headphones. A businesses center
so bleary eyed office workers can scan and e-mail documents long
into the night.) This implicit focus on community interaction makes
The Lacey a more public and civic building, governed by the rules
of public transparency (at the Lacey—quite literally—with
glass and the ability to see neighbors) and accountability (which
comes with neighborly familiarity). That makes it the more appropriate
for Washington, D.C., where the cultural dialogue is largely set
by civil servants and elected leaders for whom no political crusade
can sustain itself without a community of support. |