Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
BZA approves rooftop pergola with setback relief at 1337 Connecticut Ave NW
Loading...
Summary
The District of Columbia Board of Zoning Adjustment approved a modification to allow a rooftop pergola with retractable roof and temporary sides at 1337 Connecticut Ave NW, granting setback relief after the Office of Planning recommended approval and the board received letters of neighborhood and ANC support.
The District of Columbia Board of Zoning Adjustment on a 3–0–2 vote approved application 18906C to allow a pergola with a retractable roof and temporary side panels over an existing rooftop restaurant at 1337 Connecticut Avenue NW.
The pergola will sit on the Seventh Floor rooftop of a seven‑story building that was converted from office use to a hotel with restaurant and bar areas. The applicant sought a special exception from the penthouse setback rules in Subtitle C §1504.1(c)(4) because the proposed pergola would not meet the required one‑to‑one setback from the northern and southern lot lines.
Office of Planning development review specialist Mike Jurkovich told the board OP supports the modification and recommended approval, and the applicant said they had letters of support from the ANC and neighboring properties. Architect David Belcher and development lead Will Lansing said the building is nearly complete and the rooftop activation is planned for the summer; Lansing said they expect a certificate of occupancy within about a week to 10 days.
Board Chairman Fred Hill said he understood the request and had no objections; Vice Chair Carl Blake and Commissioner Tammy Stidham also voted to approve. Chairman Hill said he would give weight to OP’s recommendation and to the ANC and neighbors’ support. The secretary recorded the vote as 3–0–2 to approve application 18906C on a motion by Chairman Hill, seconded by Vice Chair Blake.
The approval covers the setback relief only; the board noted the pergola is an open structure with a retractable roof and temporary roll‑down panels and framed the approval on the applicants’ representation that the structure will not appear as an extension of the building wall. The board did not add additional conditions beyond receiving OP’s report and the recorded support letters.
