Tax Breaks for 10th Street? Why recreate the boring facade?

“Dear PoPville,

I’m hoping my fellow readers could weigh in on something I’m curious about. I walk past a house on 10th St. NW between M and N almost every day while walking my dog. I’ve watched this total gut rehab since just after it started. I know you’ve covered this house on the site previously, but I’d like to go into further detail about why they’re building it the way they are. When they first started work the entire structure was knocked down except the facade. There was little-to-no historic value and certainly no aesthetic value in the facade, so I’m wondering if they just kept it because they were required to by historic district rules (if there are any) or because they got tax breaks for doing so. If the builder is getting tax breaks for keeping it I have a serious issue with that. As you can see from my photos below, they completely removed a series of layers and are now putting up brand new siding. Coupled with the new windows there is literally not one single remaining item from the original facade except the shape of it. Obviously all this worked needed to be done, and I’m 100% in favor of new developments, I’m just wondering why anyone would do this. Would love some input, and also curious if there’s a way to find out what tax breaks the developer is getting, if anything, out of this deal. Thanks!”