Say NO to Bowser on changing building height limits

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, ^ right.

Basically, I'm saying that if DC has this magic wand to tell developers what to do. then tell them what to do. We don't have to change the ONLY unique features of our city for them. There's plenty of land yet to be developed, and the Mayor and Council can easily pass laws to incentivize mixed income housing within current height requirements. What exactly is magical about seven stories??

They have the right to tell them what to do when applying for a PUD or other project that goes before the zoning commission, They don't have the right to force affordable units on a matter of right projects.

Where is all this "plenty of land yet to be developed?"

Take a walk around. Stuff gets razed and rebuilt all the time. Stuff is going up right now in tenleytown. Anacostia is pretty much grazing land. The wharf just happened. There is tons of development.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, ^ right.

Basically, I'm saying that if DC has this magic wand to tell developers what to do. then tell them what to do. We don't have to change the ONLY unique features of our city for them. There's plenty of land yet to be developed, and the Mayor and Council can easily pass laws to incentivize mixed income housing within current height requirements. What exactly is magical about seven stories??

They have the right to tell them what to do when applying for a PUD or other project that goes before the zoning commission, They don't have the right to force affordable units on a matter of right projects.

Where is all this "plenty of land yet to be developed?"

Take a walk around. Stuff gets razed and rebuilt all the time. Stuff is going up right now in tenleytown. Anacostia is pretty much grazing land. The wharf just happened. There is tons of development.

Poe's law invoked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, ^ right.

Basically, I'm saying that if DC has this magic wand to tell developers what to do. then tell them what to do. We don't have to change the ONLY unique features of our city for them. There's plenty of land yet to be developed, and the Mayor and Council can easily pass laws to incentivize mixed income housing within current height requirements. What exactly is magical about seven stories??

They have the right to tell them what to do when applying for a PUD or other project that goes before the zoning commission, They don't have the right to force affordable units on a matter of right projects.

Where is all this "plenty of land yet to be developed?"

Take a walk around. Stuff gets razed and rebuilt all the time. Stuff is going up right now in tenleytown. Anacostia is pretty much grazing land. The wharf just happened. There is tons of development.

One more time. A good build out analysis would address this - looking at parcels where redevelopment under current zoning is economically viable.

Those who think there is plenty of room for redevelopment should not fear a thorough build out analysis.

[Anonymous]

Just saw a headline that SF today is less racially integrated than in the 70s. So much for their big build.

[Anonymous]

Lots of undeveloped parcels along Rhode Island Avenue...There's plenty more density to be added without increasing the height limit.

One of the pressures to increase development in less developed areas of the city is the height limit. There's lots more growth to be added without turning into Rockville or Arlington.

Now, that said, I'm not actually against raising the height limit. But to say there's no more space left is to pretend that NW is the only sector of the city.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lots of undeveloped parcels along Rhode Island Avenue...There's plenty more density to be added without increasing the height limit.

One of the pressures to increase development in less developed areas of the city is the height limit. There's lots more growth to be added without turning into Rockville or Arlington.

Now, that said, I'm not actually against raising the height limit. But to say there's no more space left is to pretend that NW is the only sector of the city.

There have been several development in the RI Avenue area recently. A big one is getting underway right by the Met Branch Trail. Once Navy Yard and NoMa are built out, RI Avenue development will accelerate.

People keep implicitly assuming that the time to raise the height limit is AFTER there are no more suitable parcels for development. That does not make sense. If a parcel can be redeveloped now at say, 14 stories, and a height limit change would allow 20 stories, and you build it at 14 stories in 2020, and DC gets to build out in 2030, the 14 story building won't magically grow to 20 stories. You will have a new 14 story building there. Tearing it down and building over again to get 6 more stories will not be economical. You need to reexamine (and possibly change) the height limit when build out is in sight, not AFTER build out takes place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of undeveloped parcels along Rhode Island Avenue...There's plenty more density to be added without increasing the height limit.

One of the pressures to increase development in less developed areas of the city is the height limit. There's lots more growth to be added without turning into Rockville or Arlington.

Now, that said, I'm not actually against raising the height limit. But to say there's no more space left is to pretend that NW is the only sector of the city.

There have been several development in the RI Avenue area recently. A big one is getting underway right by the Met Branch Trail. Once Navy Yard and NoMa are built out, RI Avenue development will accelerate.

People keep implicitly assuming that the time to raise the height limit is AFTER there are no more suitable parcels for development. That does not make sense. If a parcel can be redeveloped now at say, 14 stories, and a height limit change would allow 20 stories, and you build it at 14 stories in 2020, and DC gets to build out in 2030, the 14 story building won't magically grow to 20 stories. You will have a new 14 story building there. Tearing it down and building over again to get 6 more stories will not be economical. You need to reexamine (and possibly change) the height limit when build out is in sight, not AFTER build out takes place.

Oh well. No one wants the height raised. Not now or in 2030. So guess it doesnt matter

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of undeveloped parcels along Rhode Island Avenue...There's plenty more density to be added without increasing the height limit.

One of the pressures to increase development in less developed areas of the city is the height limit. There's lots more growth to be added without turning into Rockville or Arlington.

Now, that said, I'm not actually against raising the height limit. But to say there's no more space left is to pretend that NW is the only sector of the city.

There have been several development in the RI Avenue area recently. A big one is getting underway right by the Met Branch Trail. Once Navy Yard and NoMa are built out, RI Avenue development will accelerate.

People keep implicitly assuming that the time to raise the height limit is AFTER there are no more suitable parcels for development. That does not make sense. If a parcel can be redeveloped now at say, 14 stories, and a height limit change would allow 20 stories, and you build it at 14 stories in 2020, and DC gets to build out in 2030, the 14 story building won't magically grow to 20 stories. You will have a new 14 story building there. Tearing it down and building over again to get 6 more stories will not be economical. You need to reexamine (and possibly change) the height limit when build out is in sight, not AFTER build out takes place.

Oh well. No one wants the height raised. Not now or in 2030. So guess it doesnt matter

Can I get to ride in your time machine when you are done with it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of undeveloped parcels along Rhode Island Avenue...There's plenty more density to be added without increasing the height limit.

One of the pressures to increase development in less developed areas of the city is the height limit. There's lots more growth to be added without turning into Rockville or Arlington.

Now, that said, I'm not actually against raising the height limit. But to say there's no more space left is to pretend that NW is the only sector of the city.

There have been several development in the RI Avenue area recently. A big one is getting underway right by the Met Branch Trail. Once Navy Yard and NoMa are built out, RI Avenue development will accelerate.

People keep implicitly assuming that the time to raise the height limit is AFTER there are no more suitable parcels for development. That does not make sense. If a parcel can be redeveloped now at say, 14 stories, and a height limit change would allow 20 stories, and you build it at 14 stories in 2020, and DC gets to build out in 2030, the 14 story building won't magically grow to 20 stories. You will have a new 14 story building there. Tearing it down and building over again to get 6 more stories will not be economical. You need to reexamine (and possibly change) the height limit when build out is in sight, not AFTER build out takes place.

Oh well. No one wants the height raised. Not now or in 2030. So guess it doesnt matter

Can I get to ride in your time machine when you are done with it?

A relative who has been out of DC a while just came back for a visit and commented with zero prompting on how nice the low buildings , wide streets and trees were.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, ^ right.

Basically, I'm saying that if DC has this magic wand to tell developers what to do. then tell them what to do. We don't have to change the ONLY unique features of our city for them. There's plenty of land yet to be developed, and the Mayor and Council can easily pass laws to incentivize mixed income housing within current height requirements. What exactly is magical about seven stories??

They have the right to tell them what to do when applying for a PUD or other project that goes before the zoning commission, They don't have the right to force affordable units on a matter of right projects.

Where is all this "plenty of land yet to be developed?"

Take a walk around. Stuff gets razed and rebuilt all the time. Stuff is going up right now in tenleytown. Anacostia is pretty much grazing land. The wharf just happened. There is tons of development.

The stuff going up in tenleytown is redevelopment of exiting buildings and infil of a suburban style office campus. Anacostia a grazing land? I take it you have never been there. It is a developed historic district with new development coming around the edges, unless you are referring to the federally owned Poplar Point, which is very complicated to do a land transfer unless you happen to have an extra place for a helipad for the Park Service.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, ^ right.

Basically, I'm saying that if DC has this magic wand to tell developers what to do. then tell them what to do. We don't have to change the ONLY unique features of our city for them. There's plenty of land yet to be developed, and the Mayor and Council can easily pass laws to incentivize mixed income housing within current height requirements. What exactly is magical about seven stories??

They have the right to tell them what to do when applying for a PUD or other project that goes before the zoning commission, They don't have the right to force affordable units on a matter of right projects.

Where is all this "plenty of land yet to be developed?"

Actually. They do. The law require that even matter of right projects above a certain size include IZ housing (which is not really “affordable”, but that’s a different discussion.). The problem is that developers will engage “Phil Sleazoninglawyer” to find loopholes or hire fixers like “Streatwerks” to spread some cash around and voila!, statutory requirements seem to disappear by the time permits get issued.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, ^ right.

Basically, I'm saying that if DC has this magic wand to tell developers what to do. then tell them what to do. We don't have to change the ONLY unique features of our city for them. There's plenty of land yet to be developed, and the Mayor and Council can easily pass laws to incentivize mixed income housing within current height requirement juirements. What exactly is magical about seven stories??

They have the right to tell them what to do when applying for a PUD or other project that goes before the zoning commission, They don't have the right to force affordable units on a matter of right projects.

Where is all this "plenty of land yet to be developed?"

Take a walk around. Stuff gets razed and rebuilt all the time. Stuff is going up right now in tenleytown. Anacostia is pretty much grazing land. The wharf just happened. There is tons of development.

The “stuff going up in Tenleytown” is like 2000 new residences. That’s not chickenshit. But I get that developers would salivate at the profits from building a 30-story tower next to the Mational Cathedtal.

The stuff going up in tenleytown is redevelopment of exiting buildings and infil of a suburban style office campus. Anacostia a grazing land? I take it you have never been there. It is a developed historic district with new development coming around the edges, unless you are referring to the federally owned Poplar Point, which is very complicated to do a land transfer unless you happen to have an extra place for a helipad for the Park Service.

[Anonymous]

The “stuff going up in Tenleytown” is like 2000 new residences. That’s not chickenshit. But I get that developers would salivate at the profits from building a 30-story tower next to the National Cathedral.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, ^ right.

Basically, I'm saying that if DC has this magic wand to tell developers what to do. then tell them what to do. We don't have to change the ONLY unique features of our city for them. There's plenty of land yet to be developed, and the Mayor and Council can easily pass laws to incentivize mixed income housing within current height requirements. What exactly is magical about seven stories??

They have the right to tell them what to do when applying for a PUD or other project that goes before the zoning commission, They don't have the right to force affordable units on a matter of right projects.

Where is all this "plenty of land yet to be developed?"

Actually. They do. The law require that even matter of right projects above a certain size include IZ housing (which is not really “affordable”, but that’s a different discussion.). The problem is that developers will engage “Phil Sleazoninglawyer” to find loopholes or hire fixers like “Streatwerks” to spread some cash around and voila!, statutory requirements seem to disappear by the time permits get issued.

IIUC that is because the IZ requirements accompany an automatic zoning waiver (allowing higher floor area ratio). IE they get density above the previous by right FAR.

[Anonymous]

Raising the height limit is just a wet dream fantasy of the wankers who blog for Greater Greater Washington from their moms’ basements.