Decision Summary HPA No. 94-157 through 94-175 Motion for Modification
- HPA Number
- 94-157 through 94-175 Motion for Modification
- Building Name
- 5 11th Limited Partnership Buildings
- 515-525 11th St. NW
1005-1021 E St. NW
1010-1014 F St. NW
- Date of Order
Full Text of Order
HPA Number: 94-157 through 94-175
Case Name: In the Matter of: 507-525 11th Street, N.W. (et al)
Location of Property: 523 and 525 11th Street, N.W.
Date of Decision: 11/08/1996
Type of Case/Type of Permit Sought: Second Motion for Modification/Demolition
Summary of Decision:
555 11th Limited Partnership (the “Applicant”) filed a Motion for Modification of the Mayor’s Agent’s Decision and Order of July 28, 1994 (“Original Order”) in regard to 523 and 525 11th Street, N.W., two buildings that were listed in the Original Order as being contributing buildings in the Pennsylvania Avenue historic district. The Applicant sought modification of the Original Order so that it could dismantle, catalog, and store the façades of the two buildings, rather than leave them in place during the demolition. The Applicant had previously sought and received a similar modification of the same order with regard to the buildings at 1005, 1007, and 1009 E Street, N.W. See Modification of Order, HPA 94-157 through 94-175, June 13, 1996. Based on the Chief Building Inspector’s belief that it was more likely than not that the façades would crack or fail while the project was excavating around them, the Mayor’s Agent determined that the modification “to disassemble by hand, to catalog and store, and to reconstruct the façades of the Buildings,” was an appropriate response to the perceived danger, and was consistent with the Original Order.
The project required excavation below the buildings’ façades to a depth of sixty-five feet, meaning that it would be difficult to support the façades during construction. As a result, the Applicant’s structural engineer and the Chief Building Inspector became concerned about the structural stability of the façades. Therefore, dismantling, cataloguing, storing, and reconstructing the façades was an acceptable alternative.
*Note: In the prior modified decision and order regarding this project, the Mayor’s Agent discussed “the threat to public safety” that unstable façades represented as being the impetus to modify his original order. That discussion is not present in this order.
See HPA 94-157 through 94-175, orders of July 28, 1994 and June 13, 1996.