HPA No. 2000-026 (In re. Yale Laundry)

• HPA Number: 2000-026
• Location of Property: Square 514 in NW quadrant, bound by New York Ave. (South), 4th St. (East), 5th St. (West) and M St. (North)
• Date of Decision: 06-Sep-00

Summary:

Applicant sought to subdivide and create a single lot of record of its holdings in the Mount Vernon Square Historic District in order to construct a 100-foot high hotel. The Historic Preservation Review Board (Board) unanimously recorded approval of the application for subdivision. The Mayor's Agent concluded that the subdivision was consistent with the purposes of the Act and consistent with the character of the historic district. The Mayor's Agent also noted that the recording of the Board's approval of the subdivision was "hasty," since public hearings before the Mayor's Agent are required when applications for subdivision concern historic landmarks.

Subdivision:

• Subdivision of Applicant's lots was a prerequisite to construction of the proposed hotel. Because the Mayor's Agent found that the project was consistent with the purposes of the Act given its adaptive reuse of a historic property, he ordered that the subdivision permit be granted.

• Reading subsections (a), (c), and (e) of D.C. Code § 6-1106 together, public hearings before the Mayor or his Agent are required for subdivisions of lots on which individually-designated landmarks are situated.

• Per D.C. Code § 6-1106 (c), the Historic Preservation Review Board, as agent for the Mayor, may approve an application for subdivision for a lot in a historic district without a public hearing before the Mayor's Agent if the subdivision is consistent with the purposes of the Act.

• The subdivision of the Applicant's lots was erroneously recorded with the Office of the Surveyor after the Historic Preservation Review Board approved it at an earlier meeting. Had the Mayor's Agent ruled against the subdivision, he would have directed that the prior recordation with the Office of the Surveyor be vacated and the subdivision set aside.

Mayor's Agent—Procedural:

• The Mayor's Agent must give the conclusions of the Advisory Neighborhood Commissions "great weight."

• The Historic Preservation Review Board's approval of the subdivision of Applicant's lots was erroneously recorded with the Office of the Surveyor. Had the Mayor's Agent ruled against the subdivision, he would have directed that the prior recordation with the Office of the Surveyor be vacated and the subdivision set aside.

Historic Preservation Review Board:

Reading subsections (a), (c), and (e) of D.C. Code § 6-1106 together, if a requested subdivision is for an individually-designated landmark, a public hearing before the Mayor or his Agent is required. As such, the Historic Preservation Review Board's approval and of the application for subdivision and its subsequent recordation was hasty and subject to reversal by the Mayor's Agent.

Consistent with the Purposes of the Act:

Given substantial evidence in support of the application including approval and recommendation from the Historic Preservation Review Board, the Advisory Neighborhood Council, and the Office of Planning, the Mayor's Agent found subdivision "integral to the success" of the preservation and restoration of "The Complex," a historic landmark on the site of Applicant's proposed hotel. As such, he found the subdivision consistent with the purposes of the Act and therefore necessary in the public interest.

Historic Landmark:

• When seeking approval of a proposed subdivision on a lot containing a historic landmark, it is the Applicant's burden to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Mayor's Agent that the subdivision will meet the standards of the Act.

• Reading subsections (a), (c), and (e) of D.C. Code § 6-1106 together, if a requested subdivision is for an individually-designated landmark, a public hearing before the Mayor or his Agent is required.

Historic District—Contributing Building:

The Mayor's Agent found that vacant lots do not contribute to the character of the Mount Vernon Square Historic District, but that Applicant's proposed subdivision (a prerequisite to the construction of a hotel on the site) would contribute to the character of the district by adaptive reuse of an individual landmark.

Subsequent History:

See HPA No. 05-042 order of May 3, 2005 for related history concerning this property.

-----

Files in this item

Name:

Full text of order.pdf

Size:

51.kB

Format:

PDF

View/Open

Bookview