Scrapping the DC Height Limit

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Could actually help with the lack of affordable housing in the city

Or induce investors to buy up buildable or upgradeable land to then split.

Where did you start home go? It because a three split townhouse…and an AirBnB.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's weird to me that all the talk of zoning and such is concentrated on Ward 3. Obviously parts of Ward 3 are sparse SFHs, and parts are dense along the main corridors. I totally support making the corridors denser, and probably relaxing zoning elsewhere too.

But the truth is there's lots of slightly-less-expensive-than-Ward-3 land elsewhere in DC. I understand why people don't want to live in those places! But to have a discussion solely about Ward 3 without providing an (or the) explicit reason to discuss only Ward 3 is dishonest.

Rezone everything!

The dirty little secret that the DC government, its Office of Planning, and their influencers in the Smart Growth lobby don’t want to talk about is that Ward 3 in fact contains the second highest number of rent controlled units in the District. They don’t like to talk about it because it complicates their simplified narrative that DC needs to “build, baby, build!” lots more market rate apartments and condos with the expectation that some minimally required number of inclusionary zoning (IZ) units trickle down. The rent controlled housing stock in Ward 3 currently provides an important source of workforce housing with access to better schools, etc. Most of these are in older, more modest buildings in Ward3. The DC government through its new comprehensive plan and other programs (like the poorly structured voucher program) perverse incentives for these buildings to be bulldozed or converted to market rate, upscale housing. Even if the renovated or newly constructed buildings contain a handful of IZ units, those are fewer than the rent controlled units lost and tend to be at lower price points. The DC government should be doing all that it can to preserve and expand rent controlled housing, particularly in already-expensive areas like Ward 3, which is important to fixed income seniors and lower wage workers.

[Anonymous]

Ah, I see crazy "rent control lady" is back.

Unless or until you have a better way for the city to expend resources on affordable housing, the IZ and IZ+ rules are what we have.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ah, I see crazy "rent control lady" is back.

Unless or until you have a better way for the city to expend resources on affordable housing, the IZ and IZ+ rules are what we have.

DC’s IZ rules are a giveaway to developers. Many cities have double DC’s requirements.

The reason that IZ is “what we have” is that Bowser is not serious about truly affordable housing. She likes IZ because it doesn’t cost her budget as is a light burden on developers. Most importantly, IZ provides a pretext for arguing for more and more upscale development to get a few more IZ crumbs.

If Bowser were serious about affordable housing, especially west of Rock Creek Park, she would build it on the UDC campus or have bought the Marriott Wardman.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's weird to me that all the talk of zoning and such is concentrated on Ward 3. Obviously parts of Ward 3 are sparse SFHs, and parts are dense along the main corridors. I totally support making the corridors denser, and probably relaxing zoning elsewhere too.

But the truth is there's lots of slightly-less-expensive-than-Ward-3 land elsewhere in DC. I understand why people don't want to live in those places! But to have a discussion solely about Ward 3 without providing an (or the) explicit reason to discuss only Ward 3 is dishonest.

Rezone everything!

The dirty little secret that the DC government, its Office of Planning, and their influencers in the Smart Growth lobby don’t want to talk about is that Ward 3 in fact contains the second highest number of rent controlled units in the District. They don’t like to talk about it because it complicates their simplified narrative that DC needs to “build, baby, build!” lots more market rate apartments and condos with the expectation that some minimally required number of inclusionary zoning (IZ) units trickle down. The rent controlled housing stock in Ward 3 currently provides an important source of workforce housing with access to better schools, etc. Most of these are in older, more modest buildings in Ward3. The DC government through its new comprehensive plan and other programs (like the poorly structured voucher program) perverse incentives for these buildings to be bulldozed or converted to market rate, upscale housing. Even if the renovated or newly constructed buildings contain a handful of IZ units, those are fewer than the rent controlled units lost and tend to be at lower price points. The DC government should be doing all that it can to preserve and expand rent controlled housing, particularly in already-expensive areas like Ward 3, which is important to fixed income seniors and lower wage workers.

The best new Ward 3 new build is the renters only condos at the new Wegmans. 9K for a 3 bedroom. A month. Thanks Muriel - affordable housing at your best! And all you Ward 3 build or die folks - pony up! its gonna cost you! Oh, is that not affordable housing you all demand in ward 3??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's weird to me that all the talk of zoning and such is concentrated on Ward 3. Obviously parts of Ward 3 are sparse SFHs, and parts are dense along the main corridors. I totally support making the corridors denser, and probably relaxing zoning elsewhere too.

But the truth is there's lots of slightly-less-expensive-than-Ward-3 land elsewhere in DC. I understand why people don't want to live in those places! But to have a discussion solely about Ward 3 without providing an (or the) explicit reason to discuss only Ward 3 is dishonest.

Rezone everything!

The dirty little secret that the DC government, its Office of Planning, and their influencers in the Smart Growth lobby don’t want to talk about is that Ward 3 in fact contains the second highest number of rent controlled units in the District. They don’t like to talk about it because it complicates their simplified narrative that DC needs to “build, baby, build!” lots more market rate apartments and condos with the expectation that some minimally required number of inclusionary zoning (IZ) units trickle down. The rent controlled housing stock in Ward 3 currently provides an important source of workforce housing with access to better schools, etc. Most of these are in older, more modest buildings in Ward3. The DC government through its new comprehensive plan and other programs (like the poorly structured voucher program) perverse incentives for these buildings to be bulldozed or converted to market rate, upscale housing. Even if the renovated or newly constructed buildings contain a handful of IZ units, those are fewer than the rent controlled units lost and tend to be at lower price points. The DC government should be doing all that it can to preserve and expand rent controlled housing, particularly in already-expensive areas like Ward 3, which is important to fixed income seniors and lower wage workers.

+1

The way that DC is decimating rent control by paying MORE in the name of affordable housing is... criminal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ah, I see crazy "rent control lady" is back.

Unless or until you have a better way for the city to expend resources on affordable housing, the IZ and IZ+ rules are what we have.

DP but it’s pretty well established now that rent control has an important policy role to play. IZ on the other hand has not demonstrated substantial value to creating incentives for constructing new affordable housing anywhere.

If your objection to rent control is market distortion, that doesn’t hold a lot of water if you are promoting IZ - which is a mechanism to create direct welfare payments from renters who cannot afford to buy to poorer renters who wouldn’t otherwise be able to afford to rent. Not exactly easing the affordability burden. In fact, it does the opposite and in a lot of IZ buildings there are IZ eligible renters subsidizing others in IZ units. Incomprehensible policy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's weird to me that all the talk of zoning and such is concentrated on Ward 3. Obviously parts of Ward 3 are sparse SFHs, and parts are dense along the main corridors. I totally support making the corridors denser, and probably relaxing zoning elsewhere too.

But the truth is there's lots of slightly-less-expensive-than-Ward-3 land elsewhere in DC. I understand why people don't want to live in those places! But to have a discussion solely about Ward 3 without providing an (or the) explicit reason to discuss only Ward 3 is dishonest.

Rezone everything!

The dirty little secret that the DC government, its Office of Planning, and their influencers in the Smart Growth lobby don’t want to talk about is that Ward 3 in fact contains the second highest number of rent controlled units in the District. They don’t like to talk about it because it complicates their simplified narrative that DC needs to “build, baby, build!” lots more market rate apartments and condos with the expectation that some minimally required number of inclusionary zoning (IZ) units trickle down. The rent controlled housing stock in Ward 3 currently provides an important source of workforce housing with access to better schools, etc. Most of these are in older, more modest buildings in Ward3. The DC government through its new comprehensive plan and other programs (like the poorly structured voucher program) perverse incentives for these buildings to be bulldozed or converted to market rate, upscale housing. Even if the renovated or newly constructed buildings contain a handful of IZ units, those are fewer than the rent controlled units lost and tend to be at lower price points. The DC government should be doing all that it can to preserve and expand rent controlled housing, particularly in already-expensive areas like Ward 3, which is important to fixed income seniors and lower wage workers.

The best new Ward 3 new build is the renters only condos at the new Wegmans. 9K for a 3 bedroom. A month. Thanks Muriel - affordable housing at your best! And all you Ward 3 build or die folks - pony up! its gonna cost you! Oh, is that not affordable housing you all demand in ward 3??

And next door to City Ridge/Wegmans, new luxury apartments are being built in a development advertised as Northwest’s “most exclusive enclave.” More of the affordable, diverse, “inclusive” housing touted by the Smart Growth developer shills.

[Anonymous]

As long as Chairman Mendelson is on the Council, the Height Act will not be gutted and DC residents will continue to enjoy light and open vistas. We have a uniquely beautiful city. Let’s keep it that way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's weird to me that all the talk of zoning and such is concentrated on Ward 3. Obviously parts of Ward 3 are sparse SFHs, and parts are dense along the main corridors. I totally support making the corridors denser, and probably relaxing zoning elsewhere too.

But the truth is there's lots of slightly-less-expensive-than-Ward-3 land elsewhere in DC. I understand why people don't want to live in those places! But to have a discussion solely about Ward 3 without providing an (or the) explicit reason to discuss only Ward 3 is dishonest.

Rezone everything!

I think there are two issues here -- one is that the main corridors in Ward 3 could be far denser (and are all along good transit toward downtown), which is why that comes up a lot. The second is that the zoning in the sparse SFH parts of Ward 3 is exclusionary -- there's just no way people can live in most of the area unless they can pay over $1 million, often well over $1 million or even over $3 million.

You could probably get broader agreement faster on just resolving that first part, i.e.., raising height limits and increasing density on Wisconsin and Connecticut and not making many additional changes. But the reason the second one comes up is because Ward 3 is basically the only part of the city where the zoning makes it a domain for rich people only. People are uncomfortable saying that explicitly at times because it can make those of us who live here feel defensive, and it also runs directly at issues of race, class, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As long as Chairman Mendelson is on the Council, the Height Act will not be gutted and DC residents will continue to enjoy light and open vistas. We have a uniquely beautiful city. Let’s keep it that way.

Lol yes K and 20th is great. Let’s build more boxes!

[Anonymous]

Do all of you want to scrap the height requirement due to an inferiority complex? Like DC is not a “real” city unless it has skyscrapers? Seems that way. The height restriction actually makes DC a nicer place to live.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As long as Chairman Mendelson is on the Council, the Height Act will not be gutted and DC residents will continue to enjoy light and open vistas. We have a uniquely beautiful city. Let’s keep it that way.

Lol yes K and 20th is great. Let’s build more boxes!

Roslyn demonstrates that building higher doesn’t necessarily result in better design!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As long as Chairman Mendelson is on the Council, the Height Act will not be gutted and DC residents will continue to enjoy light and open vistas. We have a uniquely beautiful city. Let’s keep it that way.

Lol yes K and 20th is great. Let’s build more boxes!

Roslyn demonstrates that building higher doesn’t necessarily result in better design!

Exactly. It’s an unlivable disgrace of an “urban” space.

[Anonymous]