HPA No. 90-233 (In re. Kendrick Residence)
- HPA Number: 90-233
- Name: In Re: 10 - 8th St, SE
- Location: 10 - 8th St, SE, Square 920, Lot 821
- Date of Order: 3/30/1992
- Type: Alteration of windows (replacement with vinyl)
- Disposition: Withdrawn
- Date of Case Summary: July 25, 2006
John A. Kendrick (the "Applicant"), owner of the subject property located in the Capitol Hill Historic District, appealed the decision of the Historic Preservation Review Board denying a permit to authorize, on a retroactive basis, the replacement of original, but aged and rotting, wooden windows with vinyl windows. While waiting for a decision from the Mayor's Agent, Applicant filed a complaint against its home improvement contractor (which was unlicensed, and had installed the vinyl windows without a building permit) with the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs (the "DCRA"). Through the DCRA proceedings, the parties negotiated a settlement that provided for Applicant's home improvement contractor to apply for the proper permits for alteration, remove the vinyl windows, and install new windows that met with the approval of the Historic Preservation Division. The Mayor's Agent concluded that Applicant was permitted to withdraw his appeal and reinstated the ruling of the Historic Preservation Review Board.
Mayor's Agent - Procedural:
"The moving party to an appeal may withdraw that appeal at any time. However, when the appeal is withdrawn, the holding being appealed is reinstated."
The Mayor's Agent noted that the Historic Preservation Review Board had denied the permit to replace the rotting wooden windows with vinyl ones on the grounds that the alteration was not consistent with the purposes of D.C. Law 2-144. The staff report of the Historic Preservation Division had recommended denying the permit to replace the wooden windows with vinyl windows because it found the "removal of the original sash and the replacement with historically incorrect sash to be inappropriate to the historic character of the house and streetscape and therefore inconsistent with the purposes of D.C. Law 2-144."
Files in this item
- Decision summary.html
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
United States Court of Appeals for District of Columbia Circuit (1999-12-17)
United States District Court for the District of Columbia (1998-09-25)
District of Columbia. Court of Appeals (1995-11-17)