On October 8 th  the Council adopted changes to the Framework Element to the Comprehensive Plan. This is a big deal because it is another step toward resolving the city’s affordable housing crisis.
           The Plan is a 20-year, comprehensive document intended to be a wide-ranging guide for the government, covering important issues such as housing, transportation, human services, and land use. The Framework is the introductory chapter. Under the District’s Home Rule charter, zoning “shall not be inconsistent with” the Comprehensive Plan, so any aspects of the Plan that touch on land use definitely have an impact.
           When the Mayor submitted proposed changes to the Framework last year, her focus was on limiting citizen appeals of Zoning Commission cases, with virtually no attention to the city’s housing crisis.
           The Council held a 13 hour hearing with 154 witnesses in March 2018 where the Mayor’s proposal was roundly criticized from all sides. Housing advocates demanded that the Framework say more – much more – about the critical need for affordable housing and family-size housing. Civic groups condemned language that essentially gave the Zoning Commission  carte blanche  to be the sole interpreter of the Plan. And virtually everyone faulted the proposal for creating vagueness, not clarity, in this important planning document.
           What the Council just approved is a substantial rewrite.
         Affordable housing groups like the Coalition for Smarter Growth praised the final product: “This transformative update incorporates three of the Coalition’s priorities: ensuring the creation of affordable housing, preventing displacement, and addressing racial equity.”
           But others, such as the DC Grassroots Planning Coalition didn’t think the document goes far enough to ensure effective community participation, address racial and economic inequities, and minimize impacts such as gentrification. To be sure, these are challenges, but the new Framework addresses each in more detail than ever before – more detail than the old Framework, and more detail than the Mayor had proposed originally.  
           The critics also demanded deletion of language that could prevent broad socio-economic issues like climate crisis and gentrification from being considered by the Zoning Commission in its approval of development projects. While broad socio-economic issues are real and important, there are better ways to handle them, such as through the construction code and broad-based legislation. And since most development is matter-of-right (requiring no hearing or Zoning Commission approval), environmental and social justice advocates won’t achieve their goals, either.
           Indeed, for some the issue of land use is about stopping discretionary zoning cases: planned unit developments (PUDs), upzonings, and variances. But the city will not get better quality projects, nor meet its goal of private production of 36,000 new housing units by 2025, if discretionary cases are stopped.
           Some criticisms were based on misunderstanding. The best example of this arose from changing the definitions of six land use categories. The Council received many emails from citizens upset that the “R-1-B” zone was no longer specifically listed in the low density category – sparking concern that this was an attempt to remove single family zoning. But in fact, numerous specified zones were dropped in the final text – perhaps more than 30 across the six categories. Language was added, however, explaining that the shorter list of zones in each category is meant to be “illustrative,” and that “other zones may apply,” like R-1-B in low-density areas.
           Yes, there is at least one councilmember who wants to get rid of single-family detached zoning as a strategy to encourage increased housing density. Minneapolis did this a year ago. It appears, though, that a majority of councilmembers may not agree. The District has significantly less residential land zoned exclusively for single-family housing than other cities (for instance, 36% in DC compared to 70% in Minneapolis), and also, the District permits housing in every zone except industrial. While this idea of getting rid of zoning exclusivity for single-family detached housing may come up again, the Framework just adopted by the Council does not do this.
           The Plan is supposed to be updated – amended – every five years. The math doesn’t quite work: in 2010 the Council adopted amendments initiated by then-Mayor Fenty, and then in January 2018 Mayor Bowser began the second round of amendments by submitting a revised Framework Element.
           Now that the Council’s work on the Framework is finished, the Office of Planning released proposed changes to the rest of the Plan (some 24 chapters, or “elements”) on October 15 th . The public comment period will end in January.
           In the end, the Plan is important if for no other reason than that the Zoning Commission – and, therefore, developers – must pay attention to it.