Reply to Is there a coherent argument that loosening zoning laws will lead to affordable housing in DC?

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "Is there a coherent argument that loosening zoning laws will lead to affordable housing in DC? "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I hear this constantly asserted, as if it were self-evidently true, but cannot figure out how it could possibly be correct.

There's 700,000 people in the District. There's 5 million in the suburbs. If you add 30,000 housing units in DC, they will instantly be soaked up by people in the suburbs looking for shorter commutes.

As people move into DC from Falls Church and Rockville and Fairfax, their old places will open up for other people. Other people will move into those places from suburbs even further out, which will open up slots in places like Chantilly or Columbia or wherever else those people are coming from and that would put downward pressure on housing prices in the suburbs they've left.

But how does any of that lead to affordable housing in DC?[/quote]

1.   Our housing problem is regional.  Reducing the cost of housing in the far suburbs is also good. Plus the people who move are better off at each step.

2.  The suburbs are looking at the issue as well. Pro housing groups are supporting more development in MoCo, in Arlington, in Alexandria, etc.   The metropolitan washington council of government is setting regional goals, with targets for each jurisdiction

3. To the extent more people live closer in, this reduces road congestion, pollution, traffic accidents, etc. [/quote]

That isn't the argument the upzoning crowd makes though. They say it will lead to affordable housing in the District, and I want to know how that will happen. [/quote]

I am not sure which upzoning crowd you mean.  I follow regional discussions.  However its also of course possible that there is a limit on the number of people who would move from Arlington, Bethesda, to the District even if District rents/prices were lower.  Not everyone works in the District, and believe it or not, some people just prefer to not live in the District.

Also of course upzoning can be done in conjunction with more committed AH, but I think we already had that discussion in the other thread.   Personallly I am skeptical that the "keep density of Ward 3" crowd is sincere in wanting more committed AH in Ward 3. [/quote]

If the mayor were serious about affordable housing, she would do two things:

The first is to increase the required minimum for inclusonary zoning units in eligible projects from 10 percent (works out to about 8 percent) to something meaningfully higher, like 15-20 percent.  Even most PUDs contain only the bare statutory minimum.  Certainly much higher IZ, like 30%, should be required for large projects that take advantage of any up-change in zoning to have greater height and density.  Yet when this is suggested to OP staff, they fidget uncomfortably and tell you that development interests will fight any increase in IZ requirements.

The second is to protect the existing rent controlled housing stock.  Yet the mayor's housing plan fails to acknowledge rent control.  In Ward 3, for example, there are thousands of RC housing units, the second highest total by ward in the District.  Yet these units, in older, less flashy buildings that are tempting targets for developers, are the most vulnerable.  It will be much harder to add more affordable housing at the same time that we are losing a very significant contributing factor to affordable housing.  It's like taking one step forward and two steps backwards.

The mayor and OP should embrace both of these policy initiatives .... unless their proposed upzoning and comp plan changes aren't really about affordable housing.[/quote]

If you increase the IZ requirement too much, you reduce development and get fewer IZ units (as well as fewer market rate units)

Are all those RC (actually rent stabilized, right?) units actually inhabited by low income HHs?   Isnt retaining them by conversion to committed AH part of  Bowsers plans?

[i]She proposed putting $15 million into a Housing Preservation Fund — up from the $10 million it got last year — to help preserve existing units of affordable housing, but the Council eliminated the funding altogether.
[/i][/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics