U.S. General Services Administration U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development National Endowment for the Arts U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 451 Seventh Street, S.W. District of Columbia 20410 ■ :*'***" Charrette on Design Guidelines for the East Plaza June 29 - 30 1994 HUD’S MISSION AND PRIORITIES Under the leadership of President Bill Clinton and Secretary Henry Cisneros, the mission of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development is to help people create communities of opportunity. The Clinton Administration’s five Community Empowerment Principles define how HUD seeks to accomplish its mission: urn A Commitment to Community A Commitment to Support Families A Commitment to Economic Lift A Commitment to Reciprocity and to Balancing Individual Rights and Responsibilities A Commitment to Reducing the Separations by Race and Income in American Life The physical, economic, and social landscape of our cities is changing. Structural changes in the economy are transforming it from one based on manufacturing to one based on services. Population and job centers are relocating to the suburbs, while poor and minority populations — augmented by immigrants — are increasingly concentrated in inner-city ghettos- and barrios. The number of housing units affordable to low-income families continues to fall, and a greater and greater percentage of poor families must spend more than half of their incomes on rent and utilities. More and more homeless people huddle in our streets. The housing and community development needs of low- and moderate-income families continue to grow and change. The following HUD first-year priorities address these changing needs within the realities of fiscal restraint and through the vision and values of America’s new leadership. Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2015 https://archive.org/details/charretteondesigOOunit U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development U.S. General Services Administration National Endowment for the Arts Wednesday 8:45 am 9:00-9:30 9:30-9:45 9 :45-11:00 11 : 00 - 12:00 12:00-12:30 12:30-1:30 1:30-2:30 2:30-3:30 3:30-3:45 CHARRETTE ON DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR THE EAST PLAZA June 29-30, 1994 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 451 Seventh Street, S.W. District of Columbia Room 2184 (202)708-2000 June 29 Welcome by H. Alan Brangman, AIA, Director, Design Arts Program, NEA, Rolando Rivas-Camp, AIA, Supervisory Architect, Arts and Historic Preservation, GSA, and Marilynn A. Davis, Assistant Secretary for Administration, HUD GSA Briefing on history of site and building, and development of SW Washington by Andrea Mones-O'Hara, Regional Historic Preservation and Fine Arts Officer, GSA Briefing on the District of Columbia's Comprehensive Plan by Reginald W. Griffith, Director, National Capital Planning Commission Tour of HUD site by Marianne C. Jentilucci, Director, Facilities Operations Divison, HUD Briefing on Community Interests: District of Columbia Commission on the Arts and Humanities Advisory Neighborhood Commission 2-D St. Dominic's Catholic Church Jefferson Junior High School Briefing by HUD employees and union representatives Lunch Video: City Spaces, Human Places by William Whyte Charrette teams and observers: charrette convenes with discussion of presentations and topics to organize agenda and charrette format David Lee, Chair Break 3:45-5:15 Charrette U.S Department of Housing and Urban Development U.S. General Services Administration National Endowment for the Arts CHARRETTE ON DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR THE EAST PLAZA JUNE 29-30, 1994 continued Thursday, June 30 8:30 am Charrette 12:00-1:00 Lunch 1:00-3:30 Charrette 3:30-4:30 Wrap up and preparation for presentation 4:30-5:30 Summary Design Guideline Presentation National Endowment for the Arts Charrette Team U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development East Plaza Michael Alexander * .Artistic Director California Plaza for Metropolitan Structures West 350 Grand Avenue Suite A4 Los Angeles, CA 90071 Katherine Archuleta Deputy Chief of Staff U.S. Department of Transportation 400 7th Street, SW Room 10200 Washington, DC 20590 Peter Blake, FAIA* 140 Elm Street Branford, CT 06405 H. Alan Brangman, AIA Acting Director Design .Arts Program National Endowment for the .Arts 1 100 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Room 627 Washington, DC 20506 Pamela Holt, Director District of Columbia Commission on the Arts and Humanities 4 1 0 8th Street, NW 5th Floor Washington, DC 20004 Reginald W. Griffith Executive Director National Capital Planning Commission 801 Pennsylvania Ave., NW 7 Suite 301 Washington, DC 20576 Nora Jaso, Principal * Studio Jaso 1 1 4 West Denny Way Room 284 Seattle, WA 98119 M. David Lee, Principal ** Stull and Lee, Inc. 38 Chauncy Street, #1100 Boston, MA 02111-2301 Debra L. Mitchell, Principal/Director * Johnson Johnson & Roy/Inc. 601 13th Street, NW Suite 250 North Washington, DC 20005 Robert Peck, Group Vice President External Affairs American Institute of Architects 1735 New York Ave., NW Washington, DC 20006 Jay Willis * 206 South Marino Pasadena, CA 91107-4015 * Biography Attached ¥ *Mr. Lee will facilitate the Charrette U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and U.S General Services Administration Charrette Team U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development - East Plaza Marilynn A. Davis Assistant Secretary' for Administration U.S Department of Housing and Urban Development 451 7th Street, SW Washington, DC 20410-3000 Marie Kissick, Director Office of Administrative and Management Services U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 451 7th Street, SW Room 5168 Washington, DC 20410 Rolando Rivas-Camp, ALA Supervisory Architect Arts and Historic Preservation Division U.S. General Services Administration Andrea Mones- O'Hara, Regional Historic Preservation and Fine Arts Officer U.S. General Services Administration National Capital Region Robert Andrukonis, RA Architectural Section Chief U.S. General Services Administration National Capital Region Mr. Michael Alexander Los Angelas, CA Michael Alexander is Artistic Director of California Plaza for Metropolitan Structures West, Inc in Los Angeles. He is responsible for designing and executing a year-round program of arts and entertainment for the public in the outdoor performance areas of the mixed-use redevelopment Bunker Hill project. Previously, he was the director of performing arts at the Cultural Affairs Department of Los Angeles where his primary focus was on issues affecting local performing artists. Mr. Alexander was also the general manager of the Aman Folk Ensemble and worked for the San Frandsco Ballet For several years, he was an independent consultant and arts manager and served cn the boards fo the California Confederation of the Arts, the Association of American Dance Companies, and the Western Alliance of Arts Administrators. Mr. Peter Blake Branford, CT Peter Blake has been a practicing architect since 1955 and Professor of Architecture at The Catholic University of American since 1979, induding Chairman of the Department of Architecture and Planning from 1 979-1 986. He served as Editor-in-Chief of Architecture Plus and Architectural Forum magazines. He also has served as curator of the Department of Architecture and Industrial Design at the Museum of Modem Art He has writen numerous artides and several books on architecture including No Place tike Utopia, Form Follows Fiasco: Why Modem Architecture Hasn't Worked. God's Own Junkyard, and The Master Builders. He received a Distinghised Designer Fellowship from the National Endowmetnt for the Arts and has been a Fellow of the Graham Foundation for Advanced Studies in the Fine Arts and the American Institute of Architects. He has been a speaker at and delegate to several professional conferences in the U.S., Europe, and India and is a past chairman of the Internationa! Design Conference in Aspen. He studied in me unrtea wngaom ena received a Bacheioi of Afdnlteciure with honors from Pratt Institute, School of Architecture. Ms. Nora Jaso Seattle, WA Prinripa! of Studio jaso, her Seattle design firm, Nora Jaso has been practidng architecture since 1S82. Dedicated to cultural and artistic expression, Studio Jaso serves diverse individuals, communities, public agendas and non-profit croups. Current work renter* on the Hasten o f low-income ana spedai neeos housing, spedfically housing for the ~ homeless dients of CONSEJO, a Hispanic mental healthy counseling center, and for the Northwest AIDS Foundation. Among other of the firm's major' dients are the City of Seattle, El Centro de la Raza, Homestead Community Land t rust and Food Markets NW. Ms. Jaso is a member Seattle's innovative METRO Arts Committee and a design review member of the dty's Pike Place Market Histories! Commission. Ms. Jaso has received numerous honors, induding exhibitions, publication and design awards. She aDDeared in the recent ‘Youna Architects" issue of Pronressive Architecture in collaboration with her coileanues of the Acwiatinn for Women in Architecture. Ms. Jaso earned her bachelor of arts degree from McGill University in Montreal, studied at the Rhode Island School of Design and received her master of architecture degree from the University of Washington in Seattie. Mr. David Lee David Lee is Vice-President of the architectural and planning firm of Stull and Lee, Inc in 3oston and an adjunct professor in the Department of Boston MA Planning and Urban Design at Harvard. Mr. Lee has served as prindpal-in- charge of Boston's award-winning Southwest Corridor Transit Project the Kaenier Primary Health Care Center for the U.S. Coast Guard, the Opera Place dormrrcry at Northeastern University, and the master pian for an 850,060 square-foot mixed-use office and retail complex in Boston, among other projects. He has taught at Rhode island School of Design, Massacnusetts institute cf Technology, Harvard Graduate School of Design, and has served as studio juror and lecturer at Columbia, Harvard, Yale, and several other universities. Mr. Lee has served on the Presidential Design Awards jury, ana as a faculty participant for the Mayors' Institute for City Design. He received a Bachelor of Architecture degree from the University of Illinois and a master's in Architecture ana Urban Design from Harvard University. Ms. Debra L. Mitchell Washington, DC Debra Mitchell is senior principal ana director of the Mid-Atlantic office of the landscape architecture firm Johnson Johnson & Roy/inc Her background in the natural sciences and landscape architecture is coupled with an impressive record of group facilitation and community leadership. Ms. Mitchell's expereince indudes the design of major urban streetscapes. large mixed-use aeveiopments ana corporate neaaquarters. including the Alamo Plaza TriParty Transportation Improvement Project and The CrossRoads of San Antonio in San Antonio, TX; Fair Park Link Phase I! streetscape, Mapie Avenue improvements. Meadow Park Office Building, and University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center roof-top garden/piaza in Dallas, IX; Central Park Mall East. Omaha, NE; and The American Rose Center Master Plan, Shreveport, LA. She is the immediate past president of the American Sodety of Landscape Architects and served as vice chairman and chairman of the City cf Dallas Landmark Commission from 1987-1991. Ms. Mitchell has taught at the University of Texas at Arlington and has served on the professional advisory committee of the Deoartment of Landscape Architecture at the University of Illinois since 1988. She received a B.S. from Kansas University and a Master of Landscape Architecture from the University of Illinois. Mr*. Jay S. Willis Jay Willis is a three-dimensional artist ana a Professor of Fine Arts at the ? ^ A University of Southern California wnere he has taught since 1969. in aaena, 1990, he was director cf Public Art Studies ana from 1988-1989, chair of studio arts at USC. Mr. Willis's work has Deen exhibited nationally ana internationally with more than a cozen one-person exhibitions in the U.S. His wonc is in numerous private, corporate and museum collections, including the Metropolitan Museum of Art, NY; Hirshhom Museum and Sculpture Garden, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC; Moore College of Art, Philadelphia; De! Mar College, Corpus Christi, TX; Laguna Beach Museum of Art, Laguna Beach, CA; and Walker Hill Art Museum, Seoul, Korea. He has received commissions from the Alcoa Foundation- University of Southern California, Sculpture Garden Collection, Los Angeies; Pasaaena Plaza, Ernest W. Hahn Inc, Pasadena, CA; Pacific Enterprises. Los Angeies; and numerous other corporations. Recent honors include being a public an ccmDetiticn finalist for the City of Irvine and for the City of Thousand Oaks. Mr. Willis received a 5.F.A. in sculpture from the University of Illinois, Urbana. ana a M.A. in sculpture from the University of California. Berkeley. * CHARRETTE ON DESIGN GUIDELINES: for the EAST PLAZA PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT BUILDING TOPICS FOR CHARRETTE PANEL'S DISCUSSION A. FUNCTIONAL ISSUES: How can the 7th Street plaza's utility be enhanced for the employees 7 How can the 7th Street plaza design help support the urban setting of the neighborhood (residential, commercial, and educational)? How can the activity of contemplation occur on the 7th Street plaza? How can user (e.g. public and employees) access to the building be maintained across the 7th Street plaza? How can the amenity of food be added to the 7th Street plaza? How can the plaza design respond to the future comprehensive plans for the National Capital? How can a performing arts space be integrated into the 7th Street Plaza? How can security issues be addressed through lighting and cameras? AESTHETIC ISSUES: How can the "front door" to the Dept, of Housing and Urban Development's headquarters building (HUD) portray a stronger image of the agency's mission: Commitment to Community, Commitment to Support Families, Commitment to Economic Lift, Commitment to Reciprocity and Balancing Individual Rights and Responsibilities, and a Commitment to Reducing the Separations by Race and Income in American Life? How to make a positive statement about HUD's goals relating to the creation of a livable and attractive urban environment, i.e. howto create an inviting, multi- functional place? AESTHETIC ISSUES continued: How can Marcel Breuer’s (the original architect) design intent be respected as a significant architectural achievement? Breuer's design principles included contrast-the west plaza is grass and the east plaza is hard surfaces-- and the expression of a strong horizontal plane under the building TECHNICAL ISSUES: How can the structural integrity of the new surfacing be maintained? How can employee parking needs be managed without causing structural damage to the waterproofing? “f HH MM architrave p.c., architects LOCATION: 918fstreetn.w. Washington, d.c. 20004 (2°2) 347-2224 (2°2) 393-1641 fax SURVEY WATER DRAINAGE AND LEAKS VOL. H - FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR EAST PLAZA MODIFICATIONS HUD BUILDING 451 7th Street, S.W. Washington, DC 20407 PROJ. CONTROL NO: GSA WORK ITEM NO: DATE: Prepared by: RDC 24105 0393 Final Submission - April 1994 architrave p.c., architects 918 F Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20004 judith m. capen did robert d weinstein did TABLE OF CONTENTS: Executive Summary 3 Purpose of the Study 7 Findings, Analysis, and Recommendations 11 Architectural General Design and Materials 13 Surface Drainage 16 Waterproofing 18 Pedestrian and Vehicle Circulation 21 Service Access 25 Handicapped Accessibility 27 Plantings and Site Fixtures 28 Signage 31 Sight Lines and Views 33 Sunlight and Shade 35 Plaza Structure 37 Mechanical Engineering Electrical 39 Storm Water System 43 Domestic Water System 45 Equipment Areas 47 Historic Preservation 49 Code, Life Safety and Fire Protection 52 Environmental Safety 55 Appendix A: Photographs and Photo Key Plan 57 Appendix B: List of Applicable Codes and Government Requirements Documents 73 Appendix C: List of Design Document Review Authorities 79 HUD Plaza Feasibility Study 100% Submission 1 EXECUTIVE SUmARY HUD Plaza Feasibility Study 100% Submission 3 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The present design of the East Plaza of the HUD building is not consistent with the desired image of the agency. It feels a more inviting, people-oriented environment would be more appropriate. The purpose of this study is to determine the feasibility of modifying the plaza, and to identify the existing constraints to any modifications. The exact nature of modification to be made has not been decided upon by the government. Programming and designing the modifications are not within the scope of this study. The report determines that it is feasible to modify the plaza. It recommends that the modifications should be designed respecting the following major constraints: • Modifications should be designed as independent additions to the plaza, rather than major changes to the form or character of the plaza. • Architectural modifications should respect the modern style and materials of the plaza, but some additions like art could be of contrasting design. • Modifications to the plaza, and waterproofing repairs to the plaza, should be combined in a single project, for both the design and construction phases. • Adequate pedestrian circulation routes should continue to be provided, including accessible routes for the handicapped, emergency egress routes, and access to emergency fire connections. • Vehicle circulation routes to the garage ramps, and the passenger drop-off/fire access lane should continue to be provided. • New site furnishings and fixtures should be provided if requested by the tenant agency. • The plaza's existing structural slab can support 105 pounds per square foot of live load (in addition to a 20 psf snow load) on top of the weight of the existing plaza paving system. It would be difficult to strengthen the existing slab further. • The potentially historic quality of the architecture need not preclude some modifications if they are properly designed. • The existing power panels have sufficient excess power capacity to introduce new additional lighting for the plaza. • Sufficient drainage and water supply capacities are available near the plaza to be tapped for potential needs in the modified plaza. HUD Plaza Feasibility Study 100% Submission 5 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY HUD Plaza Feasibility Study 100% Submission 7 . • ; . PURPOSE OF THE STUDY The present design of the East Plaza of the HUD building is not consistent with the desired image of the agency. It feels a more inviting, people oriented environment would be more appropriate. The types of modifications anticipated might include additional landscaping, art works, a fountain, lighting changes, and site furnishings. The purpose of this study is to determine the feasibility of modifying the plaza, and to identify the existing constraints to any modifications. The study also provides recommendations regarding how certain constraints should affect the plaza design, and how certain existing problems should be addressed in the design of modifications. The scope of this study does not include design suggestions or determination of the client's final program requirements. It is instead meant to be an information source and guideline for those who will undertake programming and design of the modifications. The A/E team consisted of Robert Weinstein (the HPTM) and John Franklin of architrave, McMullan & Assoc, (structural engineers), and PKP Engineers (mechanical engineers). The GSA Project Officer is Eva Rakusan, the GSA Field Officer is W.E. Puryear and the Agency contact at HUD is Harold J. Williams. FORMAT The "Findings, Analysis and Recommendations" section, which follows, is divided into separate sub-sections each covering a particular issue affecting possible modifications. Each subsection includes findings regarding existing conditions, analysis of those conditions, and recommendations regarding how the issue should be addressed by the re- design. HUD Plaza Feasibility Study 100% Submission 9 FINDINGS, ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS HUD Plaza Feasibility Study 100% Submission 11 12 GENERAL DESIGN AND MATERIALS OF THE PLAZA Findings: The HUD Building is located at 451 Seventh Street S.W., in Washington, D.C. It was designed in 1965 by Marcel Breuer and built in 1968. It is a ten story building of approximately 1.16 million square feet. It has a concave attenuated H configuration with curved architectural cast stone facades, and dark stone facings on the projecting end walls. At the entry level, the building is surrounded by a plaza of bluestone pavers. The plaza paving extends under the overhang of the building to provide a covered arcade around the perimeter of the building. The outer border of the arcade is formed by the large cast-in-place concrete piers which support the outer wall of the building. This study is concerned with the East Plaza, which lies between the building and Seventh Street to the east. This plaza is above the building's multi-level underground parking garage. The concrete ramps which lead down to, and up from the garage are located on the eastern edge of the plaza, near the Seventh Street sidewalk. The driveways leading to the ramps are paved with exposed aggregate asphaltic concrete and edged with stone curbs. The level of the driveways is approximately four inches below the level of the plaza paving. The major existing materials used for the space include: -Rectangular bluestone paving in a pattern using differing sizes. -Rough board-formed concrete (called "beton brut" in the vocabulary of modem architecture) for the piers of the building, the large sign standard, and the walls beside the garage ramps. -Smooth architectural cast stone for the building facade above the first floor. -Dark stone panels on some exterior building walls. -Exposed aggregate concrete paving and granite curbs for the driveways. Analysis: The building's unusual shape, its support above the ground on a system of piers (or "pilotis"), and the continuous flat plaza which extends around and under the building are all hallmarks of international style modem architecture. These features make the HUD building more conform closely to the modernist ideal of a building as a free-standing object in space, rather than as a piece of a larger urban context. The unifying factor of the materials used is that they are all heavy, rugged materials left with a relatively natural surface finish. None are painted, polished, or colored with a surface finish. The original construction documents call for the plaza paving to be hexagonal concrete HUD Plaza Feasibility Study 100% Submission 13 pavers instead of the bluestone pavers which were actually installed when the building was built. The driveway in the plaza was originally constructed of the same bluestone pavers and was flush with the surrounding plaza. The driveway was originally defined only by lines of small precast concrete pyramids which served as bollards. Later renovations to the plaza, aimed at reducing leaks, edged the driveway with granite curbs and repaved the drive with concrete at a level approximately four inches lower than the surrounding plaza. The way the new driveway breaks up the plaza has diluted somewhat the original effect of a continuous plaza ground plane extending under the building. Recommendations: Any modifications to the plaza should be designed with an awareness of the original intention that the plaza appear to be a continuous ground plane, on and above which the building floats like a piece of free-standing sculpture. This might mean that any additions to the plaza be more like objects placed upon the plaza rather than major distortions of the ground plane itself. Changes should also respect the large scale of the space and its detail. Repairs to original features of the plaza should be made using original materials, or new materials which match original materials exactly. Materials used for new architectural additions to the plaza should respect the original intention to use rugged materials left close to their natural appearance. However, some additions to the plaza, such as art, could be of contrasting materials (slick, polished or colored) in order to set them apart from the original design features of the building and plaza. HUD Plaza Feasibility Study 100% Submission 14 HUP g/\5T PLAZA •• SCALE . D. PLUMBING STORM WATER SYSTEM Findings: There is an existing storm water system which serves the plaza area. The system consists of a series of cast iron catch basins which are located at each set of double columns along the perimeter of the building, a series of concrete catch basins located along the sidewalk/plaza line of seventh street and cast-in-place concrete trench drains located at the top of each ramp serving the parking garage. The drains are designed to collect storm water directly at the surface level of the Plaza and have also been provided with weep holes and clamping devices to collect seepage water which may collect at the slab waterproofing membrane. Refer to surface drainage section of this report for Plaza plan showing drain locations. Analysis: There is sufficient capacity with the existing storm drainage system at the plaza area (catch basins, drains and related interconnecting piping) to adequately and efficiently carry off surface water during periods of precipitation and when maintenance wash down of the surfaces by hose is being conducted. All of the cast iron catch basins are 6" in size and total 14 in quantity. In addition the concrete catch basins are 2'-8" x 2'-8" in size and total 5 in quantity. Recommendations: The existing storm water drainage system serving the plaza area can readily be modified to include any required supplemental drains and/or structures necessary to facilitate the provision of planting areas, gardens and pools or fountains and any required connections for additional surface drainage as necessary. The drainage piping can readily be modified due to it being exposed at the garage level below the Plaza. Approximately 4 to 6 feet of vertical elevation exists for proper slope and coordination of new piping with existing building systems and components and the existing storm utilities in the street. The modifications of or addition to the storm system serving the plaza area will not overload the existing piping due to the fact that the effective total surface area being drained will not change from the existing square footage being served. 43 44 DOMESTIC WATER SYSTEM Findings: There is an existing domestic water system utilizing wall hydrants to serve the plaza area. The wall hydrants are located approximately 80 feet apart along the perimeter wall of the building. In addition to the plaza level hydrants there is domestic water piping at the basement level which serves various hose bibbs, toilet rooms and building equipment. The domestic water piping at the basement level is readily accessible and conveniently located so as to provide a usable source of water to supply an irrigation system for planting or garden areas at the plaza level as well as make-up water for a pool/fountain system which may be provided under an upgrade to the existing plaza. Analysis: The existing wall hydrants located at the plaza area are 3/4" in size. These wall hydrants provide water as required for hose down of the plaza areas under routine maintenance as well as any watering of plants. Water piping located at the basement level is of adequate size to supply an automatic irrigation system and/or fountain/pool make-up water requirements. Recommendations: The existing plaza level wall hydrants should continue to be used as necessary for wash down of the paved areas and as a source of water for any potted plants which may be used for accents on the plaza area not easily served by an irrigation system. The water system at the basement level can be tapped as required to supply an automatic irrigation system to properly water any planting areas on the plaza level. The irrigation supply line would be provided with a reduced pressure type backflow preventer and would be controlled by a time clock in order to supply water for irrigation only at off-hours so as to avoid potential over demand on the piping distribution system during normal business hours. To further avoid over demand, the irrigation system could also be zoned accordingly. The water system may also be used to provide make-up water for a pool/fountain system to compensate for spillage and evaporation and may be used for initial fill of the system . The supply line to any fountain/pool system will require a reduced pressure type backflow preventer and should be controlled by an automatic fill valve. 45 EQUIPMENT AREAS Findings: There are currently several mechanical equipment rooms located at the basement level that may be available for locating any required pool/fountain pumping and filtration equipment to serve the plaza level modifications. Analysis: Any available space within existing mechanical equipment rooms to be allocated new equipment should be minimal. Recommendations: Existing building system equipment located at the basement level equipment rooms must be carefully considered and coordinated with prior to design or installation of pool/fountain equipment, meters, etc. as may be required. The use of inline pumps and/or stacked equipment including wall racks should be considered in order to minimize the required floor space needed for any new equipment. 47 ■ 48 HISTORIC PRESERVATION General: architrave p.c. architects was commissioned by the GSA/NCR to provide a study to identify the feasibility of, and constraints to, designing and constructing modifications to the East Plaza of the HUD building in order to make it "A more inviting, people- oriented environment." The A/E team consisted of Robert Weinstein (the HPTM) and John Franklin of architrave, McMullan & Assoc, (structural engineers), and PKP Engineers (mechanical engineers). The GSA Project Officer is Eva Rakusan, the GSA Field Officer is W.E. Puryear and the Agency contact at HUD is Harold J. Williams. Findings: The HUD Building is located at 451 Seventh Street S.W., Washington, D.C. The HUD Building was designed in 1965 by Marcel Breuer and built in 1968. (The building is identified on original renderings and construction documents as the "Housing and Home Finance Agency Office Building," or the "HHFA Building.") It is a ten story building of approximately 1.16 million square feet. It has a concave attenuated H configuration with a facade of architectural cast stone panels, and dark stone facings on the projecting end walls. At the entry level, the building is surrounded by a plaza deck of bluestone pavers which extend under the building into the arcade around the entire building perimeter. This building is potentially eligible for admission to the National Register of Historic Buildings, but has not been nominated. This building appears to be . in good condition. Analysis: The building was designed by an influential American architect, and is a good example of his modernist style, which was widely respected at the time. As such it deserves to be treated with a certain amount of care so as not to destroy the original design intentions. The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation recommend "Retaining the historic relationship between buildings, landscape features and open space." The plaza which surrounds and extends under the building helps define the HUD building's relationship to its site and the surrounding city, and in doing so, is an integral and important feature of the concept and design of the building. HUD Plaza Feasibility Study 100% Submission 49 Recommendations: Despite the importance of the plaza, some additions and modifications can be made without seriously compromising the original design intent of the building and plaza. In order to preserve the original strengths of the design, any new design or modifications should: -Preserve all existing original features of the Plaza. -Not attach modifications to the building itself or to existing original features of plaza. -Use original materials, or exact matches, for repaired original features of the Plaza. -Use matching materials and a compatible design style for any minor architectural additions or modifications required to the plaza for code or functional reasons. -Treat any additions as objects or features placed upon the plane of the plaza rather than as changes to the plaza character or configuration itself. Designed in this way, additions such as artworks could either be of similar style and materials to the building, or be of contrasting style and material. -Make modifications reversible. HUD Plaza Feasibility Study 100% Submission 50 CODE, LIFE SAFETY AND FIRE PROTECTION Findings: The major building code and life safety constraints on plaza modification design are: 1. Egress across the plaza from building exits - See accompanying plan 2. Access to hydrants and standpipes - See accompanying plan. 3. The fire lane required for fire apparatus access to the building. 4. Fire rating of the plaza slab, since it is the roof slab of the parking garage. Analysis: The existing egress routes and fire access are adequate. The existing two-way concrete slab and paving conforms to requirements that the structure comprising the garage roof slab have a three or four hour fire rating. The lane must conform to the requirements of NFPA 1, 3-1.1.10. Recommendations: New plaza modifications must not block egress paths from building exits, access to hydrants and standpipes, or the required fire lane. Changes must not compromise the fire rating of the slab. Of course, all new features must also conform to all applicable building and life safety codes. HUD Plaza Feasibility Study 100% Submission 53 54 ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY Findings For architrave's separate report titled "Survey Water Drainage and Leaks", Biospherics Incorporated prepared a report, dated 9 November 1993, giving the result of tests on thirteen samples of waterproof membrane from different areas of the HUD Building plazas. None (0) of the thirteen (13) samples collected were found to be asbestos- containing materials. Biospherics also reviewed reports at GSA Safety and Environmental on three previous surveys performed in the HUD building. None of the previous samples reported on dealt with plaza membrane. Analysis Although the plaza membrane does not contain asbestos, there is always the possibility that some unknown material will be uncovered during demolition that might contain asbestos. Recommendations During the design phase, the A/E should determine which areas other than the plaza might be disturbed during construction, such as mechanical equipment rooms and equipment. They should consult previous reports, or have those areas surveyed, to determine if hazardous materials are present at those locations. In addition, during demolition, the contractor should monitor the site for previously unknown suspect materials and have any such materials tested for hazardous materials content. HUD Plaza Feasibility Study 100% Submission 55 APPENDIX A: PHOTOGRAPHS HUD Plaza Feasibility Study 100% Submission 57 Photograph #1: View of East Plaza looking south from HUD Building roof. Photograph #2: View of East Plaza looking south. 60 Photograph #3: View of East Plaza looking north from across Seventh Street Photograph #4: View of East Plaza looking south from across Seventh Street 61 Photograph #5: View of garage entry ramp in East Plaza. Photograph #6: View of top of garage exit ramp in East Plaza 62 Photograph #7: Planters on East Plaza. Photograph #8: Planter and flagpole at north end of East Plaza 63 Photograph #9: View of HUD Building entry at south end of East Plaza Photograph #10: Bicycle parking enclosure next to the HUD building entry at the north end of the East Plaza 64 — Photograph #11: Concrete lighting standard with rust stains from sign mounting. 65 Photograph #12: Lighting mounted behind concrete pylon sign. 66 Photograph #13; Southeast end wall of HUD Building. 67 68 Photograph looking south of HUD Building East Plaza as originally constructed. 69 Photograph looking south from roof, of HUD Building East Plaza as originally constructed. (Prior to completion of concrete pylon sign) 71 APPENDIX B: LIST OF APPLICABLE CODES AND GOVERNMENT REQUIREMENTS DOCUMENTS HUD Plaza Feasibility Study 100% Submission 73 APPENDIX B: List of Applicable Codes and Government Requirements Documents A. Government Studies, Surveys, and Reports: 1. Historic Preservation Document #1 and #2, GSA PBS 1981, and the GSA NCR Preservation Notebook Series and the National Park Service Preservation Briefs and Tech Notes. 2. Energy Efficiency in the Federal Government, report from the Office of Technology Assessment. B. Government Requirements: 1. PBS P 34 10. 1C - Instructions to Contract Architect-Engineers. 2. PBS P 3430.2 - Design Programming for Federal Office Buildings, December 28, 1984. 3. PBS PQ 100 - The "Facility Standards for the Public Buildings Services," February 28, 1992. 4. Building Substructures, PBS (PCD): DG.4, 1977. 5. Safety and Environmental Management Program, Instructional Letter PBS- IL-92-8, and all revisions and technical supplements to it. 6. H.U.D. document: "Lead Based Paint Interim Guidelines for Hazard Identifications and Abatement" dated Sept. 1990. 7. ADM 1022 and PBS 1022.2: GSA Procedures for Historic Properties. 8. The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, and Executive Order 11593. 9. The Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Illustrated Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings, Revised 1992 (36 CFR 67). 10. GSA-NCR Fire Protection Engineering Branch (WPXF) "Development Projects" standard. Contact the Fire Protection Engineering branch at (202) 708-5236. HUD Plaza Feasibility Study 100% Submission 75 11. Federal Property Management Regulations (FPMR), Temporary Regulation D-76. 12. "Street Scape Manual", Architectural/Engineering Subgroup, August 1992. C. Codes and Regulations 1. The National Building Code (Building Officials and Code Administrators International, Inc.), modified to include the technical requirements of the Life Safety Code (National Fire Protection Association), and the seismic safety design requirements of the Uniform Building Code (International Conference of Building Officials). Article 10 of the 1993 BOCA Code is replaced by the entire contents of NFPA 101 for GSA submissions. 2. Occupational Safety and Health Regulations for Construction; 29CFR, Parts 1926 and 1910. 3. Environmental Protection Agency Regulations. 4. Handicap accessibility codes: a. Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards, Federal Standard-759, April 1, 1988, and supplements. b. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. 4151, Title HI Standards, by the Department of Justice. NOTE: All GSA projects shall comply with the more stringent standard whether it be UFAS or the Title III ADA standard. The ADA Title III contains provisions requiring retroactive measures to make existing facilities accessible. The retrofit provisions of ADA Title II will not be part of the GSA policy. 5. Applicable local codes and regulations. 6. National Fire Protection Association Standards. D. Industry Standards 1. Occupational Safety and Health Standards. HUD Plaza Feasibility Study 100% Submission 76 2. American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Publications. 3. The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), Inc., Publications. 4. National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) Publications. 5. ASHRAE Handbooks and ASHRAE Standard 62-89, ASHRAE Standard 15-92, and ASHRAE S I Guide. 6. National Roof Contractors Association, "Roofing and Waterproofing Manual." 7. SMACNA, Architectural Sheet Metal Manual. HUD Plaza Feasibility Study 100% Submission 77 APPENDIX C: LIST OF DESIGN DOCUMENT REVIEW AUTHORITIES HUD Plaza Feasibility Study 100% Submission 79 80 APPENDIX C: List of Design Document Review Authorities The following Authorities, or their designated representatives, may have the power to review, comment upon, and approve the design of any modifications to be made to the East Plaza of the HUD Building: A. General Services Administration National Capital Region Design and Construction Division Washington DC, 20407 Professional Services Branch: Architectural Section: Contact - Robert Andrukonis, (202) 708-7979 or the A/E's Project Officer Cost Management: Contact - John C. Mamey, Chief, (202) 708- 7859 Structural Engineering Section: Contact - Amit Datta, P.E., Chief, (202) 401-2145 Electrical Section: Contact - Lawrence Braun, Chief, (202) 708-8656 Safety and Environmental Management Branch Contact - Frederick J. Sisson, Chief, (202) 708-5236 Fire Protection Engineering Branch Contact - Deidre A. Traff, Section Head, (202)708-5236 Historic Preservation Contact - Andrea Mones O'Hara, Regional Historic Preservation Officer, (202) 798-8173, or Dale Lanzone, Director, Arts and Historic Preservation, (202) 501-1256 B. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Facilities Operations Division Washington DC 20410-3000 Contact - Marianne Jentilucci, Director, or Elaine Robinson, Deputy Director, (202) 708-2711. HUD Plaza Feasibility Study 100% Submission C. National Capital Planning Commission 801 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W., Suite 301 Washington DC 20576 Contact Ronald E. Wilson, Director, Planning Review and Implementation Division, (202) 724-0191 D. Commission of Fine Arts 708 Jackson Place NW Washington DC 20006 (202) 566-1066 E. If, before modifications are made, the building is declared eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Buildings, design modifications will have to be reviewed by the D.C. Historic Preservation Review Board (HPRB). The staff for this board is provided by: DC Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs Business and Land Regulation Administration Historic Preservation Division 614 H Street NW, room 305 Washington DC 20001 Contact: State Historic Preservation Officer, (202) 727-7360 HUD Plaza Feasibility Study 100% Submission 82 fJ(TA