205 LAND USE CHANGES

205.1 In terms of land area, at 61 square miles Washington is not a large city. It is half the size of Denver or Philadelphia, and one-fifth the size of Dallas or San Diego. It is hemmed in by adjacent cities and states and cannot grow through annexation. In 2017, it had over 11,000 people per square mile. Moreover, federal lands comprise almost 40 percent of the land in the District, making land a precious and limited resource.

205.2 Figure 2.7 shows how land in the District (including federal land), is currently used. About 28 percent of the city is developed with housing, and more than one quarter is developed with street rights-of-way. About 20 percent of the city's land area consists of permanent open space, including federally managed sites such as Rock Creek Park and the National Mall. About 465 acres of the city - or 1.2 percent of its land area consists of vacant land.

205.3 Figure 2.7: Land Use Distribution, 2016

205.4 These statistics do not tell the full story of land use in the District. For over a century, building height has been regulated by the federal Height of Buildings Act of 1910 (Height Act). The Height Act limits building height through a street-width-to-height ratio, restricting the construction of buildings to a maximum height of 130 feet in most of the downtown areas and along major avenues. The Height Act gives the city a distinctive low visual profile. In 2014, following a joint federal-District study of the Height Act, Congress made modest amendments to address penthouse height and use. In addition, there are dozens of federal and local historic districts where capacity for growth is additionally governed. Development proposals must complement the historic district in context-sensitive ways. Many areas that are not 'officially' historic also require careful consideration of development proposals to ensure compatibility.

205.5 These regulations guide development, with substantial room for growth in the District of Columbia. Key opportunities include government lands, underused commercial and industrial sites, and vacant buildings that can be repurposed and/or redeveloped. Sites vary in scale from areas with significant acreage to

smaller infill lots. Many opportunities for growth are located east of the Anacostia River. Together, these areas hold the potential for thousands of new units of housing and millions of square feet of office and retail space.

205.6 While there is substantial room for growth under current zoning, various nonregulatory factors restrict this capacity. In some areas, a real or perceived lack of services, amenities, and assets, such as transit, libraries, quality schools, grocery stores, or retail, discourages investment. In other areas, opportunities to develop above existing buildings, such as adding several stories of housing above an existing office or retail building along a commercial corridor, are intentionally deferred. In these cases, property owners wait until market conditions make redevelopment more financially lucrative. And, there are sites potentially suitable for additional development through an entitlements process (a Planned Unit Development) that instead are developed "matter-of-right" (to existing zoning standards), forgoing additional capacity. These factors, particularly to the extent they limit housing and affordable housing production or other desired uses, represent missed opportunities for the District to grow inclusively.

205.7 Fitting such development into the fabric of a mature city creates a number of challenges. One is displacement, a threat that has become more real in the District as the cost of housing and other real estate has increased due to rising demand that has not been met with proportional supply. Displacement not only affects District residents - particularly those of lower income - it also affects businesses, non-profits, and municipal operations that may be displaced by rising rents and land prices.

205.8 Whether the issue is displacement, the siting of locally undesirable but necessary uses, parking impacts, or threats to neighborhood character and stability, the development or redevelopment of land creates tension in the District of Columbia. This tension will only mount as growth pressures increase, making it even more important to have sound land use policies, urban design processes, and development review procedures that mitigate the effects of the District's competing and conflicting goals.

205.9 Figure 2.8 depicts the location of residential development in the city between 2006 and 2015. Of the 28,955 units of housing added, 88 percent were within a half mile of a Metro station area, about 25 percent were located in Central Washington, and 15 percent were located in Near Northwest. The Mid-City and Rock Creek Park West areas each absorbed about 18 and three percent, respectively, of the District's housing growth. About 12 percent of the new housing units were located east of the Anacostia River in the Far Southeast/Southwest and Far Northeast Southeast Planning Areas. However, some of this housing replaced units that were demolished, resulting in a smaller net increase.

205.10 Figure 2.8: Housing Development Activity, 2006-2015

The District of Columbia

Office of Planning – February 17, 2017

Government of the District of Columbia

This map was created for planning purposes

from a variety of sources. It is neither a

survey nor a legal document. Information

provided by other agencies should be

verified with them where appropriate.

SOURCE: District of Columbia Comprehensive Plan Act of 1984, effective April 10, 1984 (D.C. Law 5-76; 31 DCR 1049 (March 9, 1984)); as amended by District of Columbia Comprehensive Plan Act of 1984 Land Use Element Amendment Act of 1984, effective March 16, 1985 (D.C. Law 5-187; 32 DCR 873 (February 15, 1985)); as amended by District of Columbia Comprehensive Plan Amendments Act of 1989, effective May 23, 1990 (D.C. Law 8-129; 37 DCR 55 (January 5, 1990)); as amended by District of Columbia Comprehensive Plan Amendments Act of 1989 NCPC-Recommended Amendments, and Closing of Public Alleys in Square 669, S.O. 88-452, Act of 1990, effective May 23, 1990 (D.C. Law 8-132; 37 DCR 2213 (April 6, 1990)); as amended by District Government Land Use Temporary Amendment Act of 1994, effective October 1, 1994 (D.C. Law 10-190; 41 DCR 5360 (August 12, 1994)); as amended by Comprehensive Plan Amendments Act of 1994, effective October 6, 1994 (D.C. Law 10-193; 41 DCR 5536 (August 19, 1994)); as amended by District of Columbia Comprehensive Plan Act of 1984 Land Use Amendment Act of 1994, effective March 21, 1995 (D.C. Law 10-235; 42 DCR 30 (January 6, 1995)); as amended by Technical Amendments Act of 1996 effective April 18, 1996 (D.C. Law 11-110; 43 DCR 530 (February 9, 1996)); as amended by Second Technical Amendments Act of 1996 effective April 9, 1997 (D.C. Law 11-255; 44 DCR 1271 (March 7, 1997)); as amended by Comprehensive Plan Amendment Act of 1998, effective April 27, 1999 (D.C. Law 12-275; 46 DCR 1441 (February 19, 1999)); as amended by Technical Amendments Act of 1999, effective April 12, 2000 (D.C. Law 13-91; 47 DCR 520 (January 28, 2000)); as amended by Comprehensive Plan Amendment Act of 2006, effective March 8, 2007 (D.C. Law 16-300; 54 DCR 924 (February 2, 2007)); as amended by Technical Amendments Act of 2008, effective March 25, 2009 (D.C. Law 17-353; 56 DCR 1117 (February 6, 2009)); as amended by Comprehensive Plan Amendment Act of 2010, effective April 8, 2011 (D.C. Law 18-361; 58 DCR 908 (February 4, 2011)); as amended by Comprehensive Plan Framework Amendment Act of 2019, effective August 27, 2020 (D.C. Law 23-127; 67 DCR 001360 (February 14, 2020)).