Soooo, how is high-density looking to everyone now?

[Anonymous]

Still Crickets.

Could it be that the mayor and OP are rather obviously trying to sell bullshit?

https://www.bizjournals.com/washington/news/2020/04/23/bowsers-final-round-of-proposed-comp-plan-changes.html

Bowser announced Thursday that planning officials have finalized their revisions after releasing a draft in October.

D.C. staffers have spent more than three years working up amendments to the plan, a key focus for developers backing large projects in the city, but all of that work came long before the coronavirus outbreak completely upended the District’s economy. Bowser said these latest revisions seek to recognize the pandemic’s impact on the city, and incorporate feedback planners have collected about the document over the last few months.

Many of those edits focused on including public health emergencies and hospital capacity as issues the District should focus on, Trueblood said, considering that the current pandemic has exposed gaps in the city’s systems. And there was also need to moderate some of the plan’s predictions about the city’s economic growth, though Trueblood said his staff already built the plan without too many wild-eyed assumptions.

But, in general, the plan amendments are largely similar to the ones Bowser released last fall.

Those include descriptive policies, like a new emphasis on the value of adding new housing in all areas of the city, and a move away from phrases like “protect neighborhood character,” which officials believe is coded language designed to wall off wealthy areas from new construction.

"If anything, Trueblood said the proposal he’s sending to the council includes more density allowed than his team’s first draft"

The council will now have the chance to work up its own changes to Bowser’s amendments, a process led primarily by Chairman Phil Mendelson. Trueblood is still hopeful that lawmakers can pass the amendments before the end of the year, but now that the council has the coronavirus emergency consuming most of its attention — to say nothing of a delayed, extra-complex budget debate looming — that deadline will be harder than ever to meet.

[Anonymous]

That’s insane.
In a pandemic, density kills.
And this pandemic is far from over.

[Anonymous]

"If anything, Trueblood said the proposal he’s sending to the council includes more density allowed than his team’s first draft"

Seems like Pajama Boy is trying to bolster his resume to land a remunerative future job with JBG or Bozzuto.

[Anonymous]

If you read the entire article it almost sounds like the Mayor and her team are submitting this updated proposal basically in accordance with the original timeline. Are they hoping that this emergency might sweep it up into some legislation that must occur by the end of the year? They are hoping it is, but almost acknowledging that timing and budgets simply are not robust enough for them at the moment. However, if they submitted nothing, then they would be certain that the final package was not reviewed by the city council.

This was almost a 'This thing no longer stands a chance, so lets hope it just gets swept up and in case it does, lets tack those last bits of pet projects on and just go ahead and ratchet this densification up a bit more...on the off chance nobody has the time to review this during the pandemic.'

So, I would actually say that it is consistent from the administration. Never let a good disaster go to waste.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That’s insane.
In a pandemic, density kills.
And this pandemic is far from over.

Social distancing! Unless developers say no!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you read the entire article it almost sounds like the Mayor and her team are submitting this updated proposal basically in accordance with the original timeline. Are they hoping that this emergency might sweep it up into some legislation that must occur by the end of the year? They are hoping it is, but almost acknowledging that timing and budgets simply are not robust enough for them at the moment. However, if they submitted nothing, then they would be certain that the final package was not reviewed by the city council.

This was almost a 'This thing no longer stands a chance, so lets hope it just gets swept up and in case it does, lets tack those last bits of pet projects on and just go ahead and ratchet this densification up a bit more...on the off chance nobody has the time to review this during the pandemic.'

So, I would actually say that it is consistent from the administration. Never let a good disaster go to waste.

Particularly when the Bowser administration is itself a disaster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In a surprise move that is shameless even by Bowser standards, the mayor this afternoon submitted her aggressive pro-developer Comp Plan amendments to the DC Council, claiming that it provides the blueprint for DC to recover from the coronavirus crisis! Because nothing says public health like and social distancing like pushing big increases in height and density to build high end condos in SFH residential neighborhoods. And the mayor said it is urgent that the Council pass this developer giveaway soon - at a time when the Council is meeting virtually with no provision for public hearings.

As was the case with the draft proposals the final proposal does not include a proposed upzoning of a single family home zone anywhere in the city.

Now maybe it should as much of the city is zoned for single family homes and that would be a way to increase the supply and the local suburban jurisdictions mostly upzoned the lane near their Metro stations while DC never did but in this case the Office of Planning proposed no such upzonings.

So no one is coming for your single family home and you can relax.

Hmmm...so you are maintaining that none of the buildings along Wisconsin Ave will be razed and have multiple stories of apartments added on top of a new storefront?

I am looking to avoid the walking down a canyon of glass feel that cities seem to be going for.

Are there a lot of people living in single-family houses with yards on Wisconsin Avenue?

If Wisconsin Avenue isn't the right place for apartments on top of street-level commercial use, where is?

Yes. There are lots of single family and multi family homes immediately adjacent to Wisconsin Ave.

Right so as stated earlier no single family homes are being upzoned.

Also Wisconsin Ave is 120 feet from building to building and no buildings that tall are likely to get built so there is not going to be any sense of walking in a canyon but maybe you've never been in a canyon?

In Ward 3 the commercial corridors (Mass, Wisconsin, Connecticut) are all many blocks apart so the number of people who will even be able to see any new buildings will be very few and we don't need to speculate about this as Connecticut is mostly built out with buildings as tall as you'll get in any other area and that corridor is still a very desirable and nice one to live on and near with zero "canyon" like feel.

Wrong! Bowser’s Developer-friendly Office of Planning just proposed to allow “missing middle” smaller apartment buildings and triplexes into single family residential zones within one-half mile of a Metro station and within one quarter mile of a bus stop. OP soothingly calls this “gentle density.”

This would effectively change much of single family zoning in large areas of a number of neighborhoods in Ward 3.

https://dc.urbanturf.com/articles/blog/office-of-planning-recommends-gentle-density-in-transit-accessible-corridor/16763

[Anonymous]

"Because SFZ (Single family Zoned) areas are some of the city's most racially-segregated, largely retaining the demographics established by restrictive covenants and discriminatory lending, the report recommends targeting gentle density for particular areas that would achieve equity goals."

Here it is. There is no academic argument, so call the current zoning racist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"Because SFZ (Single family Zoned) areas are some of the city's most racially-segregated, largely retaining the demographics established by restrictive covenants and discriminatory lending, the report recommends targeting gentle density for particular areas that would achieve equity goals."

Here it is. There is no academic argument, so call the current zoning racist.

One of the real estate blogs, DC Urban Turf, recently published some research showing on a map the location of historical racial covenants and other restrictions. The neighborhoods that the mayor is targeting for up zoning and gentle density in ward 3 had relatively few former restrictions. Care to guess the ward with the most “density” of such former restrictions? Ward 4! Bowser’s home ward gets preferential treatment from the Office of Planning, with less proposed upzoning and the actual addition of provisions to protect “neighborhood character” from development.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"Because SFZ (Single family Zoned) areas are some of the city's most racially-segregated, largely retaining the demographics established by restrictive covenants and discriminatory lending, the report recommends targeting gentle density for particular areas that would achieve equity goals."

Here it is. There is no academic argument, so call the current zoning racist.

It's not doing that, though.

"These areas are some of the city's most racially segregated" =/= "the zoning is racist".

[Anonymous]

Bowser claims the opposite.

“Crowding and population density... are the most important factors in determining the havoc the virus can wreak....This is not just because more crowded areas increase the risk of spread, but also because we’re learning that crowding itself may also affect the death rate.”

We Know Crowding Affects the Spread. It May Affect the Death Rate.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/27/opinion/coronavirus-crowds.html?referringSource=articleShare

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Because SFZ (Single family Zoned) areas are some of the city's most racially-segregated, largely retaining the demographics established by restrictive covenants and discriminatory lending, the report recommends targeting gentle density for particular areas that would achieve equity goals."

Here it is. There is no academic argument, so call the current zoning racist.

It's not doing that, though.

"These areas are some of the city's most racially segregated" =/= "the zoning is racist".

Sorry, a policy quoted from 1937 dos not prevent a purchaser from walking into a bank today and requesting a loan. An argument can be made that in 1937 the houses were more affordable (I'd have to look at an inflation chart and verify) but any family of any color can buy those houses today. Heck you can do it online without anybody even seeing what color you are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Bowser claims the opposite.

“Crowding and population density... are the most important factors in determining the havoc the virus can wreak....This is not just because more crowded areas increase the risk of spread, but also because we’re learning that crowding itself may also affect the death rate.”

We Know Crowding Affects the Spread. It May Affect the Death Rate.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/27/opinion/coronavirus-crowds.html?referringSource=articleShare

Bowser is considering this a 'one off' scenario that should not prejudice her otherwise sound plan.

She has already thought through the other requirements for her densification and has planned accordingly with massively modernized water supply, enhanced robust electrical grid, flexible growing schooling plan for kids K-12, a responsive a growing public transportation network, and an economic base that expands beyond government and lobbying. I believe those chapters of the COMP Plan are getting published in May. /s

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bowser claims the opposite.

“Crowding and population density... are the most important factors in determining the havoc the virus can wreak....This is not just because more crowded areas increase the risk of spread, but also because we’re learning that crowding itself may also affect the death rate.”

We Know Crowding Affects the Spread. It May Affect the Death Rate.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/27/opinion/coronavirus-crowds.html?referringSource=articleShare

Bowser is considering this a 'one off' scenario that should not prejudice her otherwise sound plan.

She has already thought through the other requirements for her densification and has planned accordingly with massively modernized water supply, enhanced robust electrical grid, flexible growing schooling plan for kids K-12, a responsive a growing public transportation network, and an economic base that expands beyond government and lobbying. I believe those chapters of the COMP Plan are getting published in May. /s

” Anenhanced robust electrical grid” - this means they will allow Pepco to cut down all of the street trees to put even heavier wires on the poles.
“A flexible growing schooling plan for kids K-12, a responsive a growing public transportation network” - this means put more an more students into the same set of WOTP and to hope for the best.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Because SFZ (Single family Zoned) areas are some of the city's most racially-segregated, largely retaining the demographics established by restrictive covenants and discriminatory lending, the report recommends targeting gentle density for particular areas that would achieve equity goals."

Here it is. There is no academic argument, so call the current zoning racist.

It's not doing that, though.

"These areas are some of the city's most racially segregated" =/= "the zoning is racist".

Bowser says the way to address historic equity and inclusion issues is to increase height and density in Northwest neighborhoods to build more luxury apartments.

Clear now?