by Elizabeth Wiener
Current Newspapers staff writer
(Republished with permission from the June 10th edition of the Northwest Current. Download the newspaper here.)
The term “teardown” typically evokes a cramped old house, possibly in bad shape and sitting on a lot where a builder could put up a bigger house and rake in profits.
Now proposals to raze three large and architecturally distinctive homes are sending tremors through three Northwest neighborhoods, where some residents say the targeted houses are not “teardowns” but neighborhood treasures.
The three are very different houses facing different development proposals, but all in pricey neighborhoods which share one common attribute: They are not historic districts, where such contributing structures would be automatically protected from demolition. So neighborhood groups are hastily seeking historic landmark status for at least two of the houses – a dicey proposition for the D.C. Historic Preservation Review Board, which has only 90 days to make a decision once a raze application is submitted.
Two of what preservationists call “emergency” landmark nominations – for 3400 Massachusetts Ave. and 3020 Albemarle St. – will go before the board July 23. Meanwhile, the demolition and possible sale of those homes are in limbo. The third raze in question is at 4304 Forest Lane in Wesley Heights.
What’s behind this fledgling trend? Clearly one factor is a soaring housing market that could make it profitable to tear down even a potentially historic mansion.
“This trend is driven by developers,” said Paul DonVito, president of Foxhall Village Historic Society. “Homeowners buy a house they want to live in.”
Neighbors describe other troubling demolitions but say the three houses at issue are particularly striking. But as with most controversies, there’s another side to the story.
At 3020 Albemarle, neighbors were alarmed by a real estate listing suggesting the property just east of Connecticut Avenue could be used to “build your dream house.” The 1924 home it would replace, according to a hurriedly written landmark nomination, is “unlike any other house in Washington.” The building is “an elegantly sophisticated amalgam of Spanish Eclectic, European Minimalism, and American Modernism,” with a tower-like main block topped by red-tile roof and a third-floor solarium offering “a panoramic view of Soapstone Valley.” (Read more about the history of 3020 Albemarle.)
Jane Solomon, vice president of the Forest Hills Neighborhood Alliance, said the last owner lived there for decades but died a year or two ago. Her sons put the house on the market.
“I was really surprised to think anyone would regard it as a ‘teardown,’” Solomon wrote. “I understand the house is fabulous inside but it makes a gloomy first impression from the street.”
The D.C. tax office, in its online database, lists the assessed value as $1.4 million. The assessor rated the exterior condition as “good,” the interior and overall condition as “very good.”
But the real estate agent handling the sale, Brad Rozansky, is fuming. Rozansky said he had to take the listing down to await the outcome of the landmark nomination, which he said could drastically lower its value. He said his clients are counting on the sale to fund their retirement.
“It’s so wrong. Would you like us to do that to your house?” he said. “A lot of these houses are obsolete in today’s world.”
At 3400 Massachusetts Ave., neighbors quickly galvanized to fight a raze permit for what they call “an architectural gem” – a sprawling Mission/Spanish Eclectic-style house facing the U.S. Naval Observatory.
They say the house is also notable for two prominent owners: Christian Heurich, heir to the Heurich brewery fortune, and Dr. Marshall Parks, a forerunner in the field of pediatric ophthalmology.
“Yet a developer stands poised to raze the house because he thinks he can build a bigger and more expensive dwelling on the site, possibly several, no matter that nothing new could recapture the charm of the original, nor its beauty… at this unique location,” said Jane Loeffler, an architectural historian and member of the Massachusetts Avenue Heights Citizens Association, which sponsored the landmark nomination.
Neither a representative of the property’s current owner, State Central Bank of Iowa, nor the contract purchaser, Zuckerman Brothers, responded to requests for comment. Neighbors say the developer could build two houses if it wins permission to raze the 1925 structure, which sits on two lots. The 2015 assessment is $4.4 million, and the assessor, again, lists interior condition and overall condition as “very good.”
But a Realtor who has been inside the house described it as “a rabbit warren of rooms and additions” in “deplorable condition,” with asbestos and water damage.
“It doesn’t meet the needs of a modern family. It’s a gut job,” he said. “If it’s landmarked, the sale could go down the drain.” Of the bank owner, he said, “they have the right to sell the house at the best price, or [build to] the limits of zoning.”
And at 4304 Forest Lane, a whimsical “Storybook Tudor” sits at the edge of Wesley Heights Park, looking a bit like it came out of a Disney fairy tale. The architectural style first appeared in the 1920s, and was especially popular in California but rare in Washington, according to architectural historian Sally Berk. A visitor almost expects to see a dwarf or gnome peek out of the diamond-paned windows of the house, which was built in 1931 and purchased by Michael Sicoli this year. The raze application Sicoli submitted May 12 alarmed neighbors.
DonVito said a meeting of neighbors last week drew 45 people, all opposed to demolition: He said the house has been “lovingly restored and is in almost perfect condition.”
Sicoli, the new owner, wrote in an email that his family wants to move from Arlington to the District, nearer to his children’s schools. “We have been looking at properties in NW DC for years and are excited to have found such a great location on Forest Lane,” he wrote. “Initially we were hoping to do a renovation but it became clear that the current condition of the house would not allow for a cost-effective renovation.
Under the District’s preservation law, the city must give 30 days’ notice of raze applications. If a landmark nomination is filed before that time runs out, the raze permit can be held up for a total of 90 days to give the preservation board time to vote.
If landmark protection is granted, a property owner could appeal to the Mayor’s Agent for Historic Preservation to still allow demolition, but only if he or she can show “unreasonable economic hardship” or that demolition is “necessary in the public interest.”
Helen Urquhart says
Why do the developers get to decide actually attack settled neighborhoods? Why doesn’t the city look at the whole picture?
Like environment, traffic, schoools parking, community,
More McMansions cause ‘neighborhood blight’, not better taxe basis…
What is the Plan Stan? Who is drving the bus Gus ?
Helen
Paul says
This is reprehensible. In what could amount to an illegal taking of the property, someone is able to “tag” a house and force the owners into a long, costly, and potentially financially devasting process that is endorsed and administered by the District government. If there were fairness to the historical designation process then the persons who initiate the process on another party’s property should be required to indemify the owners against any lost value, reimburse the owners for their expenses in answering the designation claim, and post bond to ensure that the owners are made whole.
Ap says
Paul, my sentiments exactly
Andy Stevenson says
Hello Ap,
I see that you sympathize with Paul’s comments on 3020 Albemarle St. Could you please contact me; I’d like to talk to you about this issue: [email protected]
Thank you,
Andy.
Andy Stevenson says
Hello Paul,
I’m interested in your comments on 3020 Albemarle St., Could you please contact me; I’d like to talk to you about this issue: [email protected]
Thank you,
Andy.
Tracy Johnke says
Sally Lichtenstein Berk wrote this letter to the Current editor. She asked that we include it here.
Kudos to Elizabeth Weiner for her article on the threat to Northwest Washington’s residential heritage of the 1920s [“Luxury home ‘teardowns’ spur landmark fights,” June 10]. The years between World War I and the Depression were boom years characterized in residential architecture by imaginative houses in revivalist modes constructed in superior materials by skilled craftsmen. It is virtually impossible today to replicate the masterpieces that resulted from those dozen years of optimism. How sad that the desire for McMansions — as well as the lack of imagination for adapting existing houses to contemporary needs and desires — has resulted in the threat to perfectly viable residences.
But what is particularly troubling is that the real estate agent for one of the houses said that he had to take the listing down pending the city’s decision on the landmark designation. That simply isn’t true! What he does need to do is remove the words “or build your dream house” from his ad. That possibility is still to be determined. And he does need to advise any potential purchasers that there is a pending landmark nomination. But to allow his clients to lose time in advertising and showing the house is doing them a disservice.
Furthermore, the real estate agent asserts that “landmark designation could drastically lower its value.” This, also, simply isn’t true! Such action only serves to make the owners angry at what may appear to them to be a sabotage of their efforts to sell the house. How unfortunate that the real estate agent has chosen not to: 1) educate himself on the preservation process (the DC Preservation League offers such classes); 2) help his clients to understand that process; 3) inform his clients that listing the house as a potential landmark might actually attract potential buyers; 4) inform his clients of the added value of a landmarked house.
To best serve his clients, he should immediately put the house back on the market. The number of people who seek houses with landmark protection are legion, as demonstrated by the thousands of Washington residents who sought historic designation for their neighborhoods or houses; or who sought to purchase homes in neighborhoods with historic protection or individually designated houses. Among them are the residents of Capitol Hill, Cleveland Park, Dupont Circle, Foxhall Village, Georgetown, Mount Pleasant, Shaw, Sheridan-Kalorama, Strivers’ Section and Takoma Park. The strong real estate values in all of these neighborhoods proves that rather than decreasing the value of a property, historic designation actually ensures its stability and, in most cases, appreciation.
Sally Lichtenstein Berk,
Architectural history and preservation specialist