Because we believe it is important to back up claims with direct evidence, below is an account of the detailed violations of law and other nuisances neighbors have complained about arising out of the construction taking place at 605 P ST NW. We obtained copies of the building permit and architectural plans referenced below from DCRA and have made them available on the Supporting Documentation page.
Offenses, Violations and Nuisances in Connection with 605 P ST Construction:
Owners are RAZING when their permits permit ONLY renovation: The records for the “Alternation & Repair” permit (# B0903445) show DC Review Engineer Thomas Guglielmo noted on 5/27/2009 that “a raze permit must be obtained before an application for construction can be granted.” Indeed, the owners have completely razed and gutted all but the front facade of 605 P ST NW, put down new foundation, and are erecting shoddy new construction at the site from the ground up. The building plans on record with the city are of poor quality, misleading and conflicting in that some of them show an addition to be built and note that the rear wall of the property will be razed while others clearly indicate that the rear wall would not be razed. The owners never obtained raze permits or permits for the foundation work they conducted. As a result adjacent neighbors were not notified of razing and foundation work that would go on as city regulations require. Instead, the owners lied and mischaracterized their work as simple renovation and repair on the permit application as follows:
- Where the permit application asks the applicant to “check all applicable boxes” describing the “type of proposed work,” the applicant checked only “alteration and repair,” leaving unchecked the boxes “raze building,” “addition,” and “new building.”
- On the DC Green Building Act Permit Application Intake Form, the applicant checked the box indicating “scope of work” was “renovation” rather than “new construction,” “addition,” or “other.”
- On the Environmental Health Administration Construction Permit Application Supplemental Form Environmental Questionnaire, the applicant indicated that the “project description” was “renovation and repair.” The instructions for this form indicate that “renovation” means only “interior renovation;” whereas the actual construction at 605 P has involved exterior razing and new construction.
- On the “Contract Agreement Form” submitted to the District as part of the permit application, the applicant listed the description of the work as “renovation and repair” with total estimated costs listed as $36,000 (including $4,000 demolition costs, $12,000 construction, $7,000 electrical, and $5,000 plumbing) for the full scope of work under this permit.
- NEW: Builders have clearly disturbed over 50 square feet of earth and are building a retaining wall near exterior stairwell despite claiming otherwise on both counts on their permit application. The building plans also show that over 50 square feet of earth would be disturbed.
These statements have proven to be patently false. As the attached photos on one neighborhood blog demonstrate, significant, razing, excavation, demolition and new construction has taken place at 605 P St. The owner and contractor led those who approved the plans to believe that renovation would be limited to improvements made to the existing building. Instead, the owners have razed and demolished a majority of the building and erected new construction from the ground up. This scope of work presented is thoroughly inconsistent with the full gut job, razing, foundation work, and new construction from the ground up being performed at the site. Demolition, which has taken several months of workers’ time, surely cost many times more the $4,000 indicated budget. 605 P’s owner, Mr. Yousefi recently attended a Convention Center Community Association neighborhood meeting at neighbors’ invitation and openly stated he expects demolition and construction costs to exceed $1 million for this project.
It is worth noting that the permit application clearly indicates that “False statements or misrepresentations of facts on a permit application and/or plans is subject to criminal penalties pursuant to DC law 22-2405.”
Owners are erecting a BOARDING house though permits allow only a single family home: 605 P’s owner, Mr. Yousefi recently attended a neighborhood meeting at our invitation and openly stated his intention to turn 605 P into a nine-room boarding house for transients. Within the space of a week, he and his agents referred to this project as “luxury corporate apartments for World Bank employees,” “a bed and breakfast,” “a European hostel,” and a “boarding house.” The Building Permit posted for this project, #B0903445, clearly states that it is for “Alteration and Repair” with “proposed use [as a] Single Family Dwelling – R-3.” On the permit application, the proposed number of dwelling units is listed as “1.” However, the building plans show nine rooms around 200 square feet each including ensuite bathrooms and tight common spaces, clearly designed for individuals that do not want to interact with each other, which is hardly a single family home. Mr. Yousefi’s own contractor, Mr. Solemani, repeatedly admitted to several of us that the resulting boarding house would be a blight the community stating: “I would not want to live next to it.”
Neighborhood residents are concerned that a boarding house for such a large number of transient residents is inappropriate in a neighborhood which is currently struggling to overcome gangs and drug dealing, at a location across the street from the JFK City Recreation Center where many childrens’ after-school and summer programs are held, and in a property which itself used to be a famous crack house. We would like to see the owners present a clear, productive, and consistent description of their intended use for their construction before it is approved and allowed to continue.
Proper Environmental, Parking, and other Impact Reviews were not conducted for this project: At the community meeting that Mr. Yousefi recently attended, he indicated that parking, ADA disability, and other reviews for this nine-room boarding house were not required by the city because there would be no change in existing use and the floorplan and layout of the original property would be maintained. His statement is misleading because his builders are in fact erecting newly constructed building and the 1999 certificate of occupancy for a rooming house granted to a previous owner of this property states that “ANY CHANGE in … part of the premises used therefor will render this Certificate VOID.” It thus appears that by presenting this project as a simple interior renovation rather than new construction to the environmental and other regulatory bodies, the applicant misled them into thinking that the project would not require the type of new construction and impact that do in fact necessitate such review.
Owners are siphoning and stealing water and electricity from the surrounding properties: The residents at 607 P ST have caught the owners and their contractors working at 605 P, in their backyard several times, plugging in electric generators and water hoses into the outlets/faucets. This is outright theft!
Builders have totally ALTERED HISTORIC FACADE of windows reflecting lack of neighborhood stewardship: As documented on this neighborhood blog, the builders have framed windows that are smaller by a couple feet than the historic original ones or any of the other ones on this block of P ST. One of the defining architectural features of the hundred-plus year-old homes in this block are these seven foot tall windows. These actions reflects the lack of stewardship and respect for the neighborhood. The contractors have repeatedly commented that after numerous fines from the city for working without correct permits over the years, they are just “tired” of this project and “don’t care” any more, and want to get it off their hands at minimal cost and as soon as possible.
Owners and their contractors POST PRE-DATED NO-PARKING SIGNS without required 72 hours notice, then harass residents to move cars: Several times we neighbors have noticed that Emergency No Parking signs have been posted with just 24 hours notice (instead of the mandated 72 hours) but have been pre-dated to show 48 hours notice. Contractors have repeatedly been observed to have banged loudly on residents’ doors to scare them into complying with these falsified signs.
These are just a FEW of the MANY offenses taking place at 605 P ST. This is why we request prompt attention in addressing these violations and putting a stop to the illegalities and nuisances arising out of the constructing taking place at 605 P ST NW. We would like to see a truthful, clear, productive, and consistent plan for this development before further work is allowed to continue.
Neighbors Confront 605 P ST NW! 