Georgetown University’s Newspaper of Record since 1920

The Hoya

Georgetown University’s Newspaper of Record since 1920

The Hoya

Georgetown University’s Newspaper of Record since 1920

The Hoya

Review Board Rejects Athletic Facility Design

It’s back to the drawing board.

The Old Georgetown Board rejected last week the university’s design plans for a proposed new athletics facility, holding that the structure of the building would not complement the university’s historic architecture. The decision was announced only days after the local Advisory Neighborhood Commission unanimously approved the university’s proposal to construct the 90,000-square-foot, five-story athletics practice facility during its Oct. 2 meeting.

The university will now have to revise the design plans and resubmit them to the OGB. The next opportunity for approval will be at the OGB’s Nov. 1 meeting.

The architectural blueprints provided by the university to the ANC and the OGB – which are subject to change – depict a large building with a height of 88 feet and dimensions of 180 feet by 300 feet. The weight facilities and sports medicine department would be located in the basement and the locker rooms, administrative offices and coaches’ facilities would be housed on the first, second and third floors, respectively. Two basketball courts would be placed on the top floor.

According to Thomas Luebke, secretary of the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts and member of the OGB, the committee primarily objected to the new structure’s size. Additionally, he noted that the building had too few windows.

The OGB serves as an aesthetic review for all proposed construction and modifications to existing structures within the historic Georgetown area.

“The facility appears to be too monolithic, too large for the context. It is not well articulated in the context of the rich architecture on the Georgetown campus,” Luebke said. “The structure appears to be out of scale and lacking design when compared to its neighboring buildings, such as the Jesuit Residence and the Leo J. O’Donovan Dining Hall.”

According to notes provided by Luebke of last week’s meeting, the OGB suggested that portions of the structure be constructed underground, but university representatives said that would increase costs dramatically.

“The designs attempt to construct a symmetrical structure on an asymmetrical site; the building appears to be fighting its environment,” Luebke said.

The practice facility, which will be built on the current site of the tennis courts, would house locker rooms, a sports medicine department, weight training facilities, administrative and coaching offices and two basketball practice courts.

According to university spokesperson Julie Bataille, the displaced tennis courts will be moved to a location on campus that has yet to be determined.

Despite the delay from the OGB, the ANC approval allows the proposal to be considered by the District of Columbia Zoning Commission. The Commission will vote on the practice facility on Oct. 22.

The ANC also approved at its Oct. 2 meeting a modification to the plans for the Multi-Sport Facility. In response to residents’ concerns, the original blueprints, which proposed lighting structures 10 feet higher than the current temporary, portable lights, were amended to lower the height of the lights to match that of the temporary ones.

“The primary concern of those outside the Georgetown community is that the Multi-Sport Facility would be used for professional events and thus would increase neighborhood traffic,” said Jenna Lowenstein (COL ’09), student commissioner on the ANC.

She said the university has mandated that the Multi-Sport Facility not be used for professional events.

The ANC also approved the construction of the new science center, which will be located next to the new McDonough School of Business building between the Leavey Center and the Multi-Sport Facility.

The OGB approved the design of the science center and modifications to the Multi-Sport Facility.

Construction is not expected to begin on the science center until the MSB building is complete, and the science center is not expected to open before 2011.

– Yoshi Myers contributed to this report.

More to Discover