Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
ANC 3C and many neighbors back rezoning; preservation groups and housing advocates demand deeper affordability and required setbacks
Loading...
Summary
ANC 3C and dozens of residents testified in favor of rezoning Connecticut Avenue for housing and retail; opponents — preservation groups and Ward 3 housing advocates — urged the commission to require mandatory step‑backs, cap heights lower (about five stories), remove the IZ ladder cap and add lower AMI tiers (30–50%) to produce family‑sized affordable units.
Dozens of neighborhood speakers filled the public‑comment portion of the Dec. 1 Zoning Commission hearing on case 25‑09, with organized testimony both supporting and opposing OP’s Connecticut Avenue rezoning proposal.
Supporters: Janelle Pagets, chair of ANC 3C, testified that ANC 3C (by resolution, exhibit 161) voted 6‑1‑0 in favor of the amendments, describing them as the culmination of an eight‑year planning effort and necessary to revitalize the main street and add housing near transit. Multiple ANC single‑member district commissioners and neighborhood groups (Coalition for Smarter Growth, Ward 3 Vision, Cleveland Park Smart Growth) and many residents emphasized transit‑oriented development, neighborhood vitality and the corridor’s high vacancy rate as reasons to upzone.
Opponents and conditions: Several preservation organizations and Ward 3 affordable‑housing advocates urged the commission not to adopt OP’s matter‑of‑right standards without changes. Testimony from the Committee of 100, Ward 3 Housing Justice, the Cleveland Park Historical Society and others requested mandatory front‑facade setbacks/step‑downs in the zoning text (rather than leaving them as illustrations), lower maximum heights (some urged capping at five stories or ~60 feet for the Cleveland Park commercial strip), and stronger IZ requirements: removing the 125% cap on the IZ ladder and adding lower income eligibility tiers (advocates proposed 30–50% AMI for rentals) and requirements for family‑sized units.
Direct quotes: ANC chair Janelle Pagets said the changes are “the essential final step to translate community vetted policy into legally enforceable zoning.” Opponents argued that “IZ Plus is insufficient” for racial equity and urged the zoning commission to pursue deeper affordability to ensure the neighborhoods are accessible to lower‑income families.
Commissioner concerns and follow‑ups: Commissioners acknowledged the depth of public engagement and asked OP to provide post‑hearing written responses on whether the proposed matter‑of‑right envelope is consistent with Comprehensive Plan policies (notably HP‑2.4.6 on predominant height/density of contributing buildings), whether mandatory setbacks should be included in zoning rather than handled solely by HPRB, and what subsidy or DHCD interventions would be needed to deliver deeply affordable units at 30–50% AMI without stopping overall development.
Ending: The hearing record remains open for OP’s requested follow‑up materials. Commissioners signalled that they will weigh both the pro‑rezoning advocacy for housing and commerce and the preservation and equity demands before any proposed action.
