Testimony to DC Council on B23-736, the ‘Comprehensive Plan Amendment Act of 2020.’

Testimony submitted for the record on Council bill B23-736, the “Comprehensive Plan Amendment Act of 2020,” also available on the Chairman’s website at page 1,238 of this 1,278-page PDF.

CM Nadeau, Chair Mendelson, et al.,

I am writing to submit my comment, as a resident of Ward 1, on the Comp Plan proposals currently before the Council.

In general, I support the proposed changes to the Comprehensive Plan and suggest that Council: - Pass Office of Planning’s amendments, intact, as soon as possible - Support other amendments as long as they increase, not suppress, the construction of more housing citywide and especially in affluent neighborhoods; as long as amendments that further “upflum” are either maintained or expanded; and as long as they do not uphold the “protect” and “conserve” language prevalent in the 2006 land use element - Add language to the bill text that creates better Comp Plan procedures and encourages OP to begin to rewrite the 2006 plan by 2022

With regard to the first and third points, I am particularly disappointed that this process has taken so long, and will continue to. I truly believe it should not take five years to write and pass a five-year update to the plan, and I hope (a) that this can be wrapped up before Council moves on to performance-oversight and the budget and and and … (b) that the process can be improved for next time, so that the next long-term plan doesn’t take a long term just to write and pass.

I support as much density as can feasibly be added to the Future Land Use Map, particularly on publicly owned sites. For example, just within four blocks of my home at the bottom of Adams Morgan, there are enormous opportunities coming with the redevelopment of the Reeves Center and the U Street Fire/V Street police stations to add as much truly-affordable, subsidized, below-market-rate housing as possible, because these sites are publicly owned. But 2000 14th Street’s current FLUM designation is medium-density residential/commercial, and 1617 U Street & 1620 V Street are designated for moderate-density mixed-use development.

I think a high-density designation is appropriate not just for publicly-owned-space redevelopment projects at 14th & U and 17th & U streets, but for lots of places within Ward 1 (and other parts of the city, but, well, Ward 1 is where I live). As you will have heard from my friend Alex Baca and I’m sure many others, a great many of the buildings in which our neighbors live across Ward 1—the buildings which define many of our neighborhoods—could not be built under current regulations.

But even more than that, I believe that detached single-family housing, especially the large lots surrounded by grass which typify my former neighborhood on upper 16th St NW and much of Upper Northwest, are damaging to our environment and to our community. Despite the temporary effects of the coronavirus, I believe the draw of the National Capital Region as a whole is not going to lessen in the near future. Not only do we as the core of that region need most of the people moving here to actually locate within the District for economic and tax reasons, we need most of the people moving here to live as close as manageable to work, their groceries and shopping areas, and so forth for climate reasons. We are in an emergency, the world is burning, and we cannot keep driving hour after hour, day after day to work and school and errands and home again.

Rowhomes (R-3) should be our least-dense new construction going forward, and most parts of the District, especially here in Ward 1, should be significantly denser than that—and mixed-use to boot, so people can walk to the store. I therefore heartily endorse Alex’s suggestion that, to encourage more “missing middle”/“gentle density”/four-to-seven-story buildings in Ward 1, DC should change moderate-density residential designations to medium-density residential, at least, and high-density where it makes sense.

I said before that I believe the region will continue to be a draw for people moving from elsewhere — I also believe that the District, and especially the inner parts of the District, including my own Adams Morgan, will continue to be a draw for people moving into and within the region. Even if we do not build more housing, people will continue moving into the District. But unless we build more housing, basic economics suggests the prices of what housing we do have will continue to rise and push out lower-income individuals.

I want to live in a racially and economically integrated city. I believe I am better for living in an integrated city where people who want to live can afford to do so. If I have kids, I believe they will be better for growing up in such a city. Creating such a city requires more density, so that there can be more housing, so that more housing is available at a variety of price points.

Thank you,