Georgetown Law Open on Time
The Law Center will open on time, Tuesday, January 27, 2015, but liberal leave is in effect.
All designated emergency employees must report to work on time. All other employees may take unscheduled leave, but should contact their supervisor to discuss the needs of their unit and individual circumstances. Classes will begin at their normal time, unless otherwise noted on the class cancellation line: 202-662-9446 or the class cancellation page. Any changes to this announcement will be communicated through the same channels by 5:00 am on Tuesday morning.
Decision Summary HPA No. 86-219
- HPA Number
- Building Name
- Connecticut and R Street Associates building
- 1710 Connecticut Ave. NW
- Date of Order
HPA Number: 86-219
Case Name: In re 1710 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Square 92, Lot 59, Applicant, Connecticut and R Street Associates
Location of Property: 1710 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
Date of Decision: 3/14/1989
Type of Case/Type of Permit Sought: Application for a permit for demolition
Disposition: Demolition permit issued
Summary of Decision:
Connecticut and R Street Associates (“Applicant”) sought a permit to demolish the rear portion of 1710 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., a Victorian structure that is considered a contributing building in the DuPont Circle Historic District. According to the Applicant’s plans, the front façade and the first twenty-five feet of the building would remain intact. The Historic Preservation Review Board (“Review Board”) adopted the Review Board’s Staff Report and Recommendation, which approved the partial demolition based on the Applicant’s plan to retain the building’s façade. The Mayor’s Agent accepted the Review Board’s recommendation and approved the issuance of the permit for partial demolition based on the conclusion that such demolition was “consistent with the purposes of Section 2(b) of the Act.”
Consistent with the Purposes of the Act:
The Mayor’s Agent found that the additions to the rear of 1710 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. were in “poor condition and are inconsistent with the historic character of the rest of the structure,” and concluded that demolition of same was thus consistent with the purposes of the Act. The Mayor’s Agent also cited that there was no opposition to the partial demolition.
The Staff Report which was adopted by the Review Board stated that the façade would be retained, and that retention of façades is “part of a scheme which has been generally approved” by the Review Board.